district continuous improvement framework (mmd/dci) · p. 2 district continuous improvement...

District Continuous Improvement Framework(MMD/DCI)

Blueprint for district and building leadershipThird Edition, 2019

p. ii District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI) Blueprint, May 2019

AcknowledgmentsMany people across Missouri contributed to the development and evolution of this Blueprint and the overall District Continuous Improvement (MMD/DCI) framework. Special recognition goes to the following partners who have collaboratively helped shape the MMD framework into the statewide District Continuous Improvement framework.

• The Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, and Assistant Commissioners at the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for their vision and leadership.

• DESE Division of Learning Services who worked collaboratively to create alignment across offices and to support districts in their efforts to implement effective educational systems.

• All of the partners involved in the Missouri Model Districts project who tirelessly have led the development and delivery of project materials.

• Staff from the Northern Arizona University Institute for Human Development for leadership and ongoing support for the design and development of the Missouri Model Districts.

• The participating Missouri Model Districts for their willingness to collaborate, share, and inform the future of education for Missouri students.

Suggested citation: District Continuous Improvement (MMD/DCI) Blueprint, Third Edition (2019). Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: Northern Arizona

University, Institute for Human Development.

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to

Department programs and to the location of services, activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 800-735-2966; fax number 573-522-4883; email [email protected].

The contents of this framework were developed under a grant from the US Department of Education to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (#H323A170020). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume

endorsement by the Federal Government.

Personnel from the Institute for Human Development (IHD), at Northern Arizona University, provide training, education, and service for people with disabilities

and conduct research focusing on improving educational and disability systems. For over ten years, this team has worked closely with the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Office of Special Education to infuse research into professional development and the statewide system of support. This translation of research into practice occurs through the reciprocal exchange of information, between community members, partner organizations, state agencies, and the IHD. IHD is part of a national network of University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDD).

p. iiiMissouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)

Contents

Setting the StagePreface 1

Introduction 5

Framework for Effective Educational Systems 7

Foundations 9

Effective Teaching and Learning Practices 13

Supportive Context 19

Practices

Systems

Implementation Stages 25

Implementation Drivers 27

Context for Improving Systems 30

Data Informed Process 35Data

Professional Development 39

Web-Based Tools 43

Practice Profiles 48

Implementation Checklist 68

Appendix 71

Glossary of Terms 72

Resources for Further Learning 79

References 83

Support

p. iv District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI) Blueprint, May 2019

Abbreviation ExplanationCST

CT

CTE

CWIS

DACL

DBDM

DCI

DLT

ETLP

HQPD

MMD

PD

PLM

RPDC

SAPP

SBIC

VLP

Coaching Support Team

Collaborative Teams

Collective Teacher Efficacy

Collaborative Work Implementation Scale/Survey

Developing Assessment Capable Learners

Data-Based Decision Making

District Continuous Improvement

District Leadership Team

Effective Teaching and Learning Practices

High Quality Professional Development

Missouri Model Districts

Professional Development

Professional Learning Module, previously called Learning Package

Regional Professional Development Center

Self-Assessment Practice Profile

School-Based Implementation Coaching

Virtual Learning Platform

Common Acronyms

For definitions of terms used through the Blueprint, see the Glossary of Terms in the Appendix, starting on page 72.

p. 1Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)

The following impact was reported by an MMD district: "The work of MMD has impacted student achievement in our schools. We are commonly focused as a district on one goal and united in our approach thanks to the use of the rubrics and Practice Profiles provided. These tools clearly model each step and expectation of the process so that all team members understand the expectations. The MMD work will positively affect our district for years to come."

Setting the Stage: Preface

PrefaceThe District Continuous Improvement (DCI) Framework was developed through the work with Missouri Model Districts (MMD). MMD began with the 2017 - 2018 school year as an opportunity offered to 15 selected districts (91 buildings) in an effort to advance and sustain effective educational practices. In the 2018 - 2019 school year the second cohort of 49 districts (207 buildings) was added to MMD. Based on the lessons learned through MMD, DESE is initiating District Continuous Improvement (DCI) in the 2019 - 2020 school year and adding an additional 60+ districts with almost 300 buildings. Using a district-level approach, the District Continuous Improvement integrates effective academic and behavioral practices into a framework for achieving exceptional student outcomes. As with MMD, a three-year commitment to DCI is expected.

Outcomes

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is committed to maintaining a statewide system designed to support district leaders and educators to achieve exceptional outcomes for all students. Through this partnership, DESE and participating districts work collaboratively to achieve the following outcomes:

• scale-up the MMD/DCI framework as a cohesive system of support that can be implemented statewide in any district, regardless of demographics;

• collaborate across statewide systems and resources that support effective education for ALL Missouri students;

• collect data to inform District Continuous Improvement and DESE regarding outcomes and goals for effective teaching and learning, identifying the non-negotiables (what works) and areas of flexibility when implementing in various contexts; and

• implement effective educational practices (Data-Based Decision Making, Common Formative Assessment, and Effective Teaching and Learning Practices) resulting in exceptional outcomes for all students, especially students showing risk factors, including students with disabilities.

p. 2 District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI) Blueprint, May 2019

Benefits of ParticipationWhen districts agree to participate, an important partnership begins. Through the use of the District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI), and working collaboratively with DESE, participating districts/buildings will experience the following benefits of participation.

• Districts engage in an in-depth implementation and evaluation of integrated academic and behavioral practices leading to improved instruction and student learning. Teachers and administrators benefit from professional development activities that focus on policy, process, and instruction - all research based and data driven. Students benefit not only from the improved instruction, but also by learning how to be more active participants in their own learning (Developing Assessment Capable Learners) and learning about their own thinking and learning process and how best to approach any given learning situation (Metacognition).

• Collaboration across statewide systems is an important element, providing insights for DESE's continued development of processes, resources, and expectations for supporting statewide effective education for all Missouri students.

• Districts build internal capacity and expertise to support ongoing district/school-based coaching. Coaching has proven to be essential for transferring new knowledge and skills into practice. Research has shown implementation with fidelity to dramatically improve with coaching (see pages 19-20 for a more detailed description). When districts integrate coaching into their ongoing professional learning, both the quality of teaching and results for students improve.

• Sharing lessons learned and insights with other districts/buildings is key to this statewide initiative. Lessons learned provide valuable strategies that are shared at regional and statewide collaborative meetings. Recently, district leaders had the opportunity to share strategies for implementation. Over 90% of attendees replied agreement/strong agreement to the following: The ideas and concepts demonstrated during the event were explained using a shared vocabulary, the provision of examples, and illustration of the applicability; and the presenters outlined activities, resources, and other opportunities for continues practice towards mastery.

• Districts engage in a data-driven process. By using data as a part of the process (Data-Based Decision Making), district leaders as well as teachers make decisions based on clear data, not only for district-level


Regarding a recent regional collaborative meeting, one district administrator noted that "I am pleased with the support that has been provided thus far. The information is useful and the direction we are expected to be going is clear and exciting." Another administrator replied that "we have a strong foundation and are making great strides in progress. We know where we are and where we have to go."



processes and procedures but for student-level outcomes and work plans.

• Districts gain access to online tools that provide timely data regarding implementation (VLP Dashboard, SAPP).

Key ActivitiesThe following key activities describe the interactive role of participating districts and buildings:

• participating in site visits from DESE and the Coaching Support Team (CST) as a district/building leadership team;

• developing a three-year MMD/DCI district-wide implementation plan through use of the Implementation Checklist;

• utilizing technology to enhance commitment and improve communication;

• participating in collection of educator data in the form of video recordings, interviews, and surveys (all data collection falls within district policy guidelines);

• utilizing tools (CWIS, SAPP, VLP Dashboard) to gather information regarding district and building implementation;

• participating in regional and state meetings for professional development;

• providing ongoing feedback and recommendations for improving the framework and process;

• engaging consistently with a CST; and

• engaging in district and building level professional development, as determined in collaboration with the CST.

Support for Active Engagement and Implementation with FidelityDESE provides a statewide system of support to participating districts through a partnership with MoEdu-SAIL (Missouri Educational Systems and Instruction for Learning) and Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDCs). The statewide system of support provides

• coordination of training and coaching for the districts/buildings;

• development of school-based implementation coaching at the district and building levels;

One district developed a video to provide a consistent introduction to MMD/DCI for staff in all of their buildings. They shared this video with their Coaching Support Team and it was consequently made available to all participating districts.



• resources and supports to allow the districts and buildings to more effectively participate in District Continuous Improvement;

• on-site technical assistance and observation visits; and

• cross-district collaboration and sharing.

The content from the framework is delivered through a professional development approach consisting of training, coaching, and online learning. Coaching is provided through Coaching Support Teams, comprised of members from MoEdu-SAIL and RPDCs, widening the breadth of available expertise in effective teaching/learning practices (general and special education), behavioral practices (Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Supports), leadership, data, technology, and educational systems change.

Additionally, districts/buildings will have access to DESE endorsed training and professional development materials (PowerPoints, handouts, Coaching Companion resources, and walkthrough tools) for districts wanting to provide their own in-house Professional Development. District leaders and teachers have access to an online learning platform which provides 24-7 access to the professional learning modules.

Together, these elements form the MMD/DCI professional development approach through which partners collaborate for exceptional outcomes for all Missouri students.


By definition, a blueprint is a detailed plan of action. This Blueprint describes an approach and processes for implementing effective educational practices in Missouri districts and schools. It is a guide for developing educational systems to achieve exceptional outcomes for their students.

The Blueprint is a dynamic document - a "guide" rather than a "cookbook" - in that processes described may change in response to lessons learned in the initial stages of implementation. The contexts of Missouri districts are highly variable and diverse. The Blueprint balances the requirements of implementing evidence-based educational practices with a guided process for determining ways of supporting implementation within each unique district context.

Third EditionThis new edition is informed by feedback from districts, coaching support team members, and the DESE. The third edition clarifies content and includes updated material and revised graphics.

Why have a Blueprint?Effective educational practices are worthy of sustaining and scaling-up. This Blueprint is the road map for leading districts through all stages of the processes, from initial implementation through sustaining and scaling-up. With annual revisions to the document, the ultimate goal is a final Blueprint which will become the guide for sustaining and scaling-up effective educational practices statewide.

Intended AudienceThe intended users of this Blueprint include all partners in District Continuous Improvement, including coaching support teams, RPDCs, DESE, and district and building leadership teams together with teachers within participating districts.

Overview of ContentsThe contents begin with a description of the key functions of evidence-based educational practices and systems at district and building levels. This is followed by a description of the statewide support available to assist districts with effective and efficient implementation of these practices. The Blueprint concludes with supplemental resources, links, and other references.

Introduction to the Blueprint

Setting the Stage: Introduction

“The Blueprint is a comprehensive yet concise document that is a must read for all participants. It provides a bird’s-eye view of what the outcomes are as well as details in a step-by-step process as to how it should be implemented.”


Setting the Stage: Introduction

Step-by-Step GuideThe purpose of the Step-by-Step Guide is to provide direction and recommendations for how to effectively implement the framework. The Step-by-Step Guide is organized by essential function, as described throughout the Practice Profiles. Practice Profiles not only provide educators with concrete examples of the "how to" but also serve as a vehicle for self-monitoring implementation and growth. Throughout the Blueprint, references to the Step-by-Step Guide will be shown in the margins.

Suggested Use for the BlueprintDistrict leaders and Coaching Support Team members should familiarize themselves with the entirety of the Blueprint in order to gain a shared understanding of the integrated pieces, conduct self-assessment of current practices and resulting outcomes, and formulate an action plan.

Current team members have used the Blueprint in the following ways. They used it

• with all staff at the beginning of the school year to review principles of the content framework and effective practices;

• to build common vocabulary with the Glossary section;

• during data team meetings;

• to improve implementation of effective strategies by referring to the Practice Profiles (located in the back of the Blueprint); and

• during coaching sessions.

Companion MaterialsThe Step-by-Step Guide and the Adminitrator's Guide to Coaching are two companion products that provide valuable additional information for implementing the framework. Together with the Blueprint, the three documents create a foundational set for District Continuous Improvement.

“Classroom educators will find the Practices section useful as it gives an overview and builds meaning and understanding of key components.”

Administrator's Guide to CoachingThe purpose of the Administrator's Guide to Coaching is to provide direction and recommendations for establishing an effective approach to professional learning through coaching. This guide focuses on key aspects of successful coaching and information school leaders need to create the conditions necessary for coaching implementation within a district/building.

District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI)

Step-By-Step GuideSecond Edition, 2019


Administrator’s Guide to Coaching First Edition, 2019


Framework for Effective Educational SystemsThe Dictrict Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI) for improving educational systems is based on the work of many researchers; however, two seminal pieces of research are most evident in this framework. The first is the research conducted by Dr. John Hattie. In 2008, Dr. Hattie published Visible Learning, the result of over 800 meta-analyses relating to student achievement.1 The second is the work of Moving Your Numbers, a study conducted under the guidance of Dr. Martha Thurlow, Director of the National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) and supported by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).2

Dr. Hattie's work identified educational practices shown to have a high impact on student achievement – practices that influence learning at a greater than average rate.

The results of the Moving Your Numbers research identified six practices common to effective district-level school improvement:

1. use data well;

2. focus your goals;

3. select and implement shared instructional practices (individually and as teacher teams);

4. implement deeply;

5. monitor and provide feedback and support; and

6. inquire and learn (at the district, school, and teacher team level).

The framework focuses on three foundational educational practices essential for establishing a collaborative, data-driven teaching environment. The framework additionally addresses two effective teaching and learning practices identified from evidence-based practices shown to be highly effective in improving student achievement. Finally, to ensure fidelity and sustainability, it prioritizes coaching to build internal capacity and leadership for supporting each element through the scaling up process. Additional support is provided through the MMD/DCI materials, the MoEdu-SAIL website, and the DESE Virtual Learning Platform.

Practices: Framework for Effective Educational Systems


Practices: Framework for Effective Educational Systems

District Continuous Improvement Framework (MMD/DCI)The key components of this framework (see Figure 1 below) are

• three foundational educational practices essential for collaborative and data-informed instruction and decision making: Collaborative Teams, Data-Based Decision Making, and Common Formative Assessment;

• two effective teaching and learning practices, selected from evidence-based practices shown to be highly effective in improving student achievement: Developing Assessment Capable Learners with Feedback and Metacognition; and

• three capacity building practices that create an environment that sustains and advances effective teaching and learning: School Based Implementation Coaching, Collective Teacher Efficacy, and Leadership.

An MMD District completed a mid-year reflection with their District Leadership Team. Many positive comments were noted regarding the depth of focus and the sound structures related to MMD. One leader noted that "the MMD process is producing good ideas and collaborative efforts in our building." Another discussed the importance of talking to each other and learning new strategies from each other.

Figure 1. MMD/DCI Framework

FoundationsCollaborative TeamsData-Based Decision MakingCommon Formative Assessment

Effective Teaching & Learning Practices

Developing Assessment Capable Learners → FeedbackMetacognition

Focus on effective instruction leading to exceptional outcomes for ALL Missouri students.

Supportive ContextSchool Based Implementation CoachingCollective Teacher EfficacyLeadership


Practices: Foundations

The three foundational pieces of the framework are Collaborative Teams, Data-Based Decision Making, and Common Formative Assessment.

Foundations: Collaborative Teams (CT)When educators effectively implement group processes (create teams) and intentionally collaborate about the most effective practices within curriculum, instruction, assessment, and climate, the result is quality teaching. Quality teaching is further enhanced when educators have the processes built into their system, which allows for dialogue, discussion, and planning for all students.

Essential functions of Collaborative Teams

• Educators collaboratively develop common purposes and goals for improved student outcomes that embrace continuous school improvement.

• Educators effectively implement group processes in collaborative team meetings.

• Educators intentionally use collaborative skills in collaborative team meetings.

Key Component: Foundations

Reflection Questions

How often and how well does your team discuss:

• Data and how to monitor student progress?

• Instructional practices that are connected to student learning?

• Data to identify students needing re-teaching?

• Alignment of instructional practices to academic standards?

What group processes does your team use (i.e. agendas, minutes, norms, and roles)?

What collaborative behaviors does your team use (i.e. pausing, paraphrasing, posing questions, putting ideas on the table, providing data, paying attention to self and others, and presuming positive intentions)?

See Practice Profile, p. 48-49

The Essential Functions described here and throughout the Blueprint are highlighted in each Practice Profile, where recommendations for exemplary use are detailed. The Step-by-Step Guide provides concrete examples, as well.

The VLP online learning platform and the presenter materials on the MoEDU-Sail website provide additional indepth content on each element of the framework.


Foundations: Data-Based Decision Making (DBDM) School and district leadership teams should use a consistent DBDM process to identify and address student, school, and district improvement needs. Similarly, small groups of teachers should use a consistent DBDM process to identify students’ academic and social/behavioral needs and select practices that address those needs.

Data-Based Decision Making Cycle: GAINS

The GAINS process is designed to be flexible and to accommodate for various data-based decision making models that are being used in educational settings. The four GAINS steps are aligned to the practice profile essential functions and are a synthesis of concepts included in most DBDM models, with an emphasis on examining how instruction impacts learning.

Essential functions of Data-Based Decision Making

• Educators establish a collaborative process for collecting data = Gather

• Educators implement a process for examining and interpreting data = Analyze

• Educators determine instructional action steps = Intentionally Act & Analyze Again

• Educators use and act upon data by incorporating teaching and learning data into instruction and adjusting instruction accordingly = Notice & Adjust

Finally, through the GAINS process, educators repeat the steps with new data to promote meaningful gains in student learning.

NOTICE & ADJUSTEducators develop a process for providing and using feedback.

GATHEREducators collaborate to decide what data to collect.

ANALYZEEducators develop a process for examining and interpreting data.

INTENTIONALLY ACT & ANALYZE AGAIN

Educators determine instructional action

steps.

Data-Based Decision

Making Cycle

GAINS

SYSTEMATICALLY REPEAT

Educators repeat the steps with new data to promote meaningful gains in student learning.




How systematic is your team's approach to student data analysis?

When a common misunderstanding is discovered in the student data, how does your team address it?

How does your team assess impact when implementing an instructional change or new practice?


NOTE: Educators use many forms of measurement and assessment to determine what students are learning and how instruction or other learning environment functions should be changed in order to improve learning. Other forms include summative and diagnostic assessments. This Blueprint and accompanying professional development materials focus on common formative assessment. Refer to the resources in this Blueprint for additional guidance on these other types of assessment.

Foundations: Common Formative Assessment (CFA)Formative assessment provides ongoing information that can guide and improve teaching and learning during a learning cycle such as a lesson, unit, or course. It may include collaboratively developed assessment instruments as well as formative assessment strategies that are embedded in instruction, rather than administered as separate events. Educators use common formative assessments within a district or building to ensure that student and teacher performance is consistent across grade levels and departments. Common formative assessment is a systematic and cyclical process designed to provide timely teacher/student feedback on curricula and student learning to improve both instructional practices and academic achievement. Common formative assessment is not another instrument or event nor should it be included in grading — but rather it is a collection of practices to improve teaching and accelerate learning.3

Essential functions of Common Formative Assessment

• Educators develop clear and meaningful learning targets to guide instruction and student learning.

• Educators establish clear and measurable student success criteria in a rubric, scoring guide, or checklist.

• Educators construct and/or use quality assessment instruments of sound design and that measure the learning targets.

• Educators use assessment data to improve student learning.




What are ways in which you make sure the learning goals in your classroom are clear and meaningful?

Are your success criteria clearly aligned to learning goals? How do you make sure that your success criteria clearly relate to what students say and do?

How do you ensure that the assessments you use are high quality and provide opportunities to clearly show where students are in relation to mastery of the learning goal?


Putting the Foundations into PlaceThe foundation is established when educator teams hold collaborative solution-driven dialogues using data to describe teaching/learning practices and learner outcomes. A collaborative approach to data analysis can help all educators understand the connection between data, instructional decisions, and academic and social/behavioral outcomes for students. In order to have data available for decision making, districts and school buildings must develop and implement efficient data collection systems to ensure accurate and complete data describing both teaching practices and learner outcomes. Figure 2 highlights key elements of each of the above described foundation.


Figure 2. Foundations

Collaborative Teams

Collaboratively develop common purposes and goals for improved student

outcomes that embrace continuous school improvement.

Effectively implement group processes in collaborative meetings.

Intentionally use collaborative skills in team meetings.

Data-Based Decision Making

Establish a collaborative process for collecting data.

Implement a process for examining and interpreting data.

Determine instructional action steps.

Use and act upon data by incorporating teaching and learning data into instruction and adjusting instruction accordingly.

Common Formative Assessment

Develop clear and meaningful learning targets to guide instruction and student

learning.Establish clear and measurable student success criteria in a rubric, scoring guide,

or checklist.Construct and/or use quality assessment instruments which are of sound design

and measure the learning targets, which are aligned to the Missouri Learning

Standards.

Use assessment data to improve student learning.


Key Component: Effective Teaching and Learning Practices (ETLP)John Hattie’s seminal work, Visible Learning, was based on more than 800 meta-analyses of 50,000 research articles, about 150,000 effect sizes, and about 240 million students.1 Since that 2008 book, Hattie continues to update effect sizes based on his current research. Hattie uses a “Barometer of Influence” as a graphic illustration showing the influence of the practice on learning (see Figure 3).1,4

The following practices are included in the framework as they influence learning at a greater than average rate.

ETLP: Developing Assessment Capable Learners (DACL)“Assessment capable” does not focus on how well students perform on tests. Rather, it means that students are able to gauge their own learning, that they understand if they have met a learning target and in what areas they need extra help. According to Hattie (2012), it is important for students to know where they are going, where they are now, and how to get there.4

Teaching students to become and grow as assessment capable learners is shown through research to be a high impact practice; in fact, the effect size is "off the charts," as illustrated in Figure 4.

Practices: Effective Teaching and Learning Practices

The values above the arch indicate effect size, which is a value determined through statistical analysis to show the relative impact of a practice or intervention. Any effect above zero means achievement is raised by the practice. Alternatively, if the effect size of a practice is below zero and shown in the red zone of the barometer, then the practice has actually detracted from learning. The average effect (one year growth in one year time) size is 0.40. For any teaching/learning practice to be considered worthwhile, it needs to show an improvement in student learning of at least an average gain.

Figure 3. Barometer of Influence

1.33

Figure 4. Assessment Capable Learners Effect Size = 1.33

Hattie, J. (December 2017). Visible-Learning.org 5


DACL is a marathon, not a sprint, as one district leader noted. The information is valuable but is to be delivered and practiced in small steps to get valuable results!

Students who are assessment capable learners are accountable for their own progress and become motivated, effective, self-regulating learners. What do assessment capable learners do? Across all aspects of their learning, they

• understand what they are supposed to learn through established learning targets set daily by the teacher;

• monitor their own progress;

• set goals in relation to the learning targets; and

• reflect on their learning.

Essential functions of Developing Assessment Capable Learners

• Educators teach students to determine “Where am I Going?”

• Educators teach students to determine “Where am I Now?”

• Educators teach students to determine “How do I Close the Gap?”

FeedbackIntegral to developing assessment capable learners is the practice of feedback. When educators teach students to determine “Where am I Now?,” they do so through effective feedback. Feedback is defined as “information provided by an agent (e.g. teacher, peer, book, parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding.”6 The main purpose of feedback is to improve students’ understanding of “Where am I now?” in relation to a learning target and goal. Notice how the practice of providing effective feedback fits within the practice of developing assessment capable learners.

Feedback can occur in many forms; however, not all forms are effective. Research shows learning improves when feedback addresses a specific learning task, incorporates strategies for improving performance on tasks, and is available in multiple modalities. Praise, punishment, and extrinsic rewards are the least effective forms of feedback.6


When coaching students to develop learning goals, do you use rubrics or scoring guides and sample work?

Do you provide ongoing and meaningful feedback to students?

Do you provide opportunity for students to self-reflect and document their learning?




Essential functions of effective Feedback

• Educators provide descriptive task feedback to all students that clearly links to learning goal and success criteria.

• Educators provide feedback about strengths and offers information to guide improvement to all students multiple times throughout the learning process.

• Educators pace instruction to allow for frequent, descriptive feedback to all students and allows time for students to act on the feedback received.

• Educators ask students to self-regulate by assessing their own progress and justifying their assessments multiple times throughout the learning process.

• Educators instruct students to set personal goals based on feedback and self-assessment.




When providing student feedback, do you provide descriptive feedback to all students?

Does your feedback recognize strengths?

Do you instruct students to set personal goals based on feedback and self-assessment?

Do you pace instruction to allow students to act on feedback received?


ZONE OF DESIRED EFFECTS

Typical

Teacher

EffectsDevelopmental

Effects

REVERSE

0

.15

.30 .40 .50

.60

.70

.80

.90

1.0

ETLP: MetacognitionMetacognition occurs when a student is conscious of his/her thinking and level of cognition while in the process of learning.7 Metacognitive learners develop mental maps or pictures as a way of connecting ideas and concepts. They pose internal questions to guide their inquiry. They consciously review their learning steps/tasks and self-evaluate their own outcomes.8 Along with feedback, metacognitive practices align with developing assessment capable learners. When determining current level of learning and ways of closing the learning gap, educators should

• model metacognitive practices by talking about thinking and learning in general and specifically talking about one’s own thinking and learning; and

• provide opportunities for students to assess current thinking and learning.

When teachers actively guide the development of metacognitive learning, they do so in tandem with providing feedback. For example, a teacher may notice inconsistencies in a class’s ability to solve a type of mathematical equation and need to re-teach the concept. While re-teaching, the teacher models metacognitive processes when demonstrating the computation by verbally detailing and analyzing each step. By doing this, the teacher has shared a window of insight into the teacher’s thinking process as well as given the students words and sequences to use during independent practice. As the teacher continues the lesson by providing students individual and group feedback, the teacher prompts the students to “talk through” the steps, giving reasons why each step is in a logical order.

Similar to feedback and developing assessment capable learners, metacognitive practice has a positive influence on learning (see Figure 5).


Hattie, J. (December 2017). Visible-Learning.org 5

Figure 5. Metacognition Effect Size = 0.60

Less lecture teaching + more feedback = better learning. Wiggins (2012)


Essential functions of Metacognition

• Educators model metacognitive practices by talking about his/her thinking and learning and thinking and learning in general.

• Educators provide opportunity for students to think about the best way to approach or accomplish the learning target and connect to prior experiences.

• Educators provide opportunity for students to monitor progress in relation to learning target and success criteria.

• Educators provide opportunity to determine if learning target was met and reflect on what went well, what did not go well, and what to do differently next time.



Do you talk about your thinking and learning when providing or demonstrating a skill?

Do you provide opportunities for students to share their thinking and problem-solving?

Do you provide opportunities for students to assess their learning and share ways of improving their learning?

See Practice Profile, p. 56


Integrating Effective Teaching and Learning PracticesDeveloping assessment capable learners, feedback, and metacognition are not isolated practices, rather they should be incorporated into daily instruction. Both feedback and metacognition fit within the overall structure of developing assessment capable learners, with feedback integrated into the DACL materials. For specific guidance on how to implement the practices, see the Resources sections of this Blueprint. Figure 6 highlights key elements of above described practices.


Figure 6. Integrating Effective Teaching/Learning Practices

Developing Assessment Capable Learners (DACL)

Teach students to determine "Where am I going?"

Teach students to determine "Where am I now?"

Teach students to determine "How do I close the gap?"

Feedback

Provide descriptive feedback linking learning goals to success criteria.

Provide feedback about strengths and offer information to guide

improvement.Pace instruction to allow for frequent, descriptive feedback to all students

and allow time for students to act on the feedback received.

Prompt students to assess their own progress.

Instruct students to set personal goals based on feedback and self-

assessment.

Metacognition

Model metacognitive practices by talking about his/her thinking and learning and

learning in general.Provide opportunities for students to think about the best way to approach or

accomplish the learning target and connect to prior experiences.Provide opportunities for students to monitor progress in relation to learning

target and success criteria.Provide opportunities to determine if learning target was met and reflect on what

went well and what did not go well and what to do differently next time.

→


Practices: Supportive Context

Key Component: Supportive ContextSchool-Based Implementation Coaching (SBIC)School-based implementation coaching is critical to supporting the development of effective teaching and learning practices. Educators often receive exposure to or training on a new practice and are then asked to use this new practice in their classrooms with their students. Applying new practices into one’s own context has challenges. Mistakes in implementation, negative reactions from others (students or colleagues), or the energy needed to problem solve issues can derail a teacher’s efforts and often results in little or no application of the new practice. A coach can help model effective implementation, provide feedback to guide implementation and problem solve barriers to implementation. Effective coaching support can ensure successful implementation of new skills and practices learned in training.

Research over the past two decades has shown the positive impact of coaching on the application of effective teaching and learning practices, as well as on student achievement.9 Traditional training can build new knowledge, provide opportunities for skill rehearsal, and time for processing new information. However, it is through coaching that the transfer of new skills to classroom practice occurs. In their article, Gottfredson & Mosher (2012) discuss five “moments” in learning that coaching support is helpful.

1. When learning to do something for the first time

2. When expanding their use of something they have already learned

3. When applying or adapting a skill to a new context

4. When problems arise

5. When learning to do something differently 10

As educational approaches and practices advance, both new and experienced educators benefit from coaching.

Essential functions of School-Based Implementation Coaching

• Developing and maintaining coaching relationships

• Providing effective feedback

• Developing a strategic and differentiated coaching plan

• Engaging in solution-driven dialogue

• Monitoring progress of implementation of effective educational practices





Is peer-to-peer coaching occurring in your school/district?

If so, do peer coaches follow an established protocol or observation and feedback?

Is coaching feedback descriptive, relevant to the context, strengths-based, and respectful?

Why is Coaching Important?

A variety of school-based benefits have been linked to coaching (Education World, 2019), including

• improved student achievement;

• improved teacher efficacy and satisfaction;

• boosted sense of shared responsibility and collaboration;

• more cohesive, positive school culture;

• increased trust and collegiality among staff;

• improved focus on student achievement;

• curriculum alignment;

• improved teaching;

• wider repertoire and better understanding of instructional strategies and resources; and

• reduced job stress.



Collective Teacher Efficacy (CTE)

As John Hattie continues to add to the research base (investigating 252 practices in 1200 meta-analysis and over 65,000 studies), collective teacher efficacy is the influence ranked as having the highest effect size for impacting student achievement, at 1.57.5 The framework continues to evolve as it is informed by both research and practice, with CTE emerging as a key component for what works effectively in schools.

Collective teacher efficacy is a shared belief among teachers in a school that together their efforts will have a positive effect on student learning. Through collaborative efforts with all staff, district leaders, as well as principals and teacher-leaders can successfully build CTE through the following actions (Brinson and Steiner, 2007). They can

• build instructional knowledge and skills of all teachers;

• create opportunities for teachers to collaboratively share skills and experience;

• provide actionable feedback on teacher performance; and

• involve teachers in shared decision-making.

School leaders can design intentional support for establishing CTE by providing opportunities for the teachers to experience self-efficacy, as outlined in the seminal work of Bandura (1977).

• Mastery Experience (experience success firsthand), the strongest source

• Vicarious Experience (success, as modeled by others)

• Social Persuasion (where trusted sources give feedback and encouragement)

• Affective State (physiological effects)

The collection of Professional Learning Modules align to and support the development of CTE. Through participation in the modules as shared learning, educators build knowledge, practice instructional skills, engage in collaborative problem solving, and receive coaching with descriptive feedback and encouragement. Each of these opportunities, in addition to the CTE focused professional learning module, are designed to foster CTE school wide and district wide.

Watch for the new Professional Learning Module on Collective Teacher Efficacy currently in progress!



Becoming an Instructional Leader of Your BuildingResearch shows a clear link between strong school leadership and student learning. Effective educational leaders know how to build and strengthen a network of organizational support that includes the professional capacity of teachers and staff, the professional community in which they learn and work, family and community engagement, and effective, efficient management and operations of the school. Effective educational leaders are


Essential functions of Collective Teacher Efficacy

District/building leaders

• provide opportunities for teachers to experience the four sources of efficacy, and teachers have a combined belief that they have a major impact on student learning;

• provide opportunities for teacher collaboration that encourages the development of social networks focused on improving instructional practice;

• design school structures, promote professional development, and allot time in ways that support the development of teacher leadership;

• establish a climate that values teacher voice in decision making; and

• design intentional supports that promote collaborative teacher inquiry.


Would the majority of educators in your district/building say that they have the primary impact on student learning?

Do the majority of teachers participate in formal and informal collaborative social networks?

Do the majority of teachers participate in school leadership opportunities through school improvement committees, providing professional learning, curriculum development, professional organizations and/or family/community partnerships?

Do teachers examine their educational practices collaboratively with others?

Would teachers say they have an influential voice in district/building decisions?




As an educational leader, how do you provide a collaborative culture among teachers and students?

How do you use data to determine effective practices to implement school/districtwide?

How do you support and guide the use of common formative assessments?

In what ways have you developed leadership team capacity for data-based decision making?


driven by the school’s mission, vision, and core values. They are called to act ethically and with professional integrity. They promote equity and cultural responsiveness. Finally, effective educational leaders believe their school can always be better.

District-level and school building-level leadership have important guiding and supporting roles in MMD/DCI. District leaders are responsible for determining and addressing needs for professional learning of building-level leaders and educators across the district. Through collaborative assessment of current reality and strategic planning for addressing needs, district leaders support the development, scaling-up, and sustainability of the framework foundations and teaching/learning practices.

Essential functions of Becoming an Instructional Leader of Your Building

• A collaborative culture and climate is visible through the students, teachers, and administrators.

• Leadership supports and ensures teaching and learning practices engage all students in meaningful learning.

• Leaders develop educator capacity to use formative assessment through a supportive data climate that facilitates the use of formative data.

• Leaders initiate evidence-based decisions and processes that focus on outcomes.


Systems ApproachThe work of the National Implementation Research Network11 has identified considerations for and qualities of effective systems change. The first considerations are the stages of implementation and the drivers of successful implementation. Implementation teams guide and support the implementation process. Lastly, the teams work to align and support the components of the educational system as it matures across the stages of implementation.12

Implementation StagesSix stages of implementation are identified as critical to successful implementation and resulting sustainability.

1. Exploration & AdoptionParticipating districts will begin by reviewing current strengths and needs regarding effective educational practices in the framework.

2. Program InstallationThe second stage is to establish an environment supportive of implementation.

Guiding Questions

What do we currently have in place that is effectively supporting student learning? That is supporting effective instruction? How do we know our practices are effective?

What do educators need in order to improve instruction?

What do our systems of professional development (coaching and training) look like? Is this addressing educator needs? How do we know?

Guiding Questions

At the district level, what do we need to put into place to support building-level implementation of the MMD practices?

What resources, guidance, policies, support, etc. are needed for consistency across the district? Are there unique pockets of needs within the district?

How can we best address the needs for information and establish ownership for implementation?

Systems: Implementation Stages

As the evidence-based movement has gained momentum, four significant issues have emerged in the educational context. 1. Which practices do we select to scale up and sustain? 2. How do we implement new education practices so they actually produce the intended benefits for students? 3. How do we scale up effective practices so they are available to all students? 4. How do we align system structures and function to fully support scale-up efforts as part of “education as usual” over the longer term? Fixsen, Blase, Duda, & Naoom (2010)


3. Initial ImplementationThe current status of practices and procedures has been analyzed and the stage has been set for initial implementation. During initial implementation, professional development is provided and educators begin implementing the MMD/DCI components. During this stage, it is important to monitor these early steps for fidelity and needs for support that emerge.

4. Full OperationDuring initial implementation, districts engage in a thoughtful process of what is working and what is not working as they begin implementation. Full operation is the next stage of taking implementation to scale. At a district level, full operation is implementation of the MMD/DCI framework in all schools.

5. InnovationInnovation is the stage at which the model has been fully implemented and sufficient data has been gathered. Data is analyzed and interpreted. Based on interpretations of the data, innovative modifications, additions, and subtractions are made to the model. Fixsen et al. (2005) stress the importance of refraining from innovation until ample time has been permitted for full operation. Decisions regarding changes to the model must be informed by data and intentionally planned; otherwise, the integrity of the model is jeopardized.

Systems: Implementation Stages

Guiding Questions

Are initial implementation steps proceeding as expected? What needs for resources or support are emerging?

Which aspects of the framework show promise for being effective and which need to be revisited?

What are the district-level considerations to address prior to full operation?

Guiding Questions

Is fidelity of implementation being met? If not, what resources and supports are needed to improve implementation with fidelity?

Which aspects of the framework have been proven to be effective and which require revision?


6. SustainabilityThe ultimate goal is a sustainable model of services and supports that provides a valid, reliable, and evidence-based approach to responding to the education needs of all of Missouri’s students. However, while this is the last stage of implementation, the work is not complete. Districts must continue to implement effective practices and make data-driven decisions, all while being ever mindful of the changing dynamics of student enrollment and needs.

Implementation DriversThe National Implementation Research Network identified nine infrastructure components essential for adopting and fully implementing an evidence-based practice. Referred to as “drivers,” these components address competencies important for implementation, organizational capacity to support the development of new practices, and leadership for systems change. For more information about the implementation drivers and their function in the implementation process, see National Implementation Research Network.

Competency DriversCompetency drivers ensure that education staff have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to implement new practices, as well as the feedback essential for improving practice.

Selection: Matching staff knowledge, skills, and abilities to expected performance is essential for launching and maintaining implementation of new practices.

Training & Coaching: Teachers, administrators, and other education staff need support for learning how to apply new practices in daily settings. Through coaching, teachers, administrators, and other education staff

Systems: Implementation Drivers

Guiding Questions

In what ways can the MMD/DCI work and approach be improved?

What are the implications for the integrity of MMD/DCI work if revisions are made?

What are the considerations for sustainability of MMD/DCI? Are there district-level factors to address in order to set the stage for sustaining MMD/DCI work?

See Step-by-Step Guide

Essential Functions 1 & 2


receive job-embedded guidance, observation, and feedback.

Fidelity/Performance Assessment: The practices included in the MMD framework are evidence-based. This means they have been through rigorous study to determine an impact on student achievement. Because the goal is results, like those shown through the research, it is important to monitor fidelity of implementation.

Organization DriversOrganization drivers form the supports and structures keeping implementation processes on track, evaluating drift in implementation through data, and determining adjustments to implementation as needed.

Decision-support data systems: For data-informed decisions, multiple types and sources of data are important. Data must be reliable and accessible. The collection and review of data should be built into daily education routines and processes.

Administration & Systems: Education administrators and their teams hold these responsibilities.

• Identify and address challenges

• Form clear communication protocols and feedback loops

• Develop and adjust policies and procedures

• Reduce system barriers to implementing the program as intended


Guiding Questions

Who are the people involved in MMD/DCI at all levels? Do these people have the needed experience, expertise, and time?

What do people need to know about MMD/DCI? How are they going to learn it? What are the effort, materials, format, time, and sequence required?

Is MMD/DCI implemented with fidelity? Which components are occurring with fidelity and which are not?


Essential Function 2


Leadership: Effective leadership is able to employ both technical and adaptive strategies, use data effectively, and form collaborative processes for addressing ongoing implementation hurdles.

Together, the drivers are evident and integrated in effective implementation. They are co-occurring, complementary, and compensatory. Strengths in one driver can potentially minimize the effects of a weaker driver. For more information about implementation stages and drivers, see the Implementation Research Network’s Active Implementation Hub (http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/). This website includes online modules for each component of implementation.


Guiding Questions

What do we need to make data-based decisions about MMD/DCI overall? About components of MMD/DCI?

What systems level of support is needed to keep MMD/DCI in motion? To move MMD/DCI forward?

To what extent are we aligning our MMD/DCI work to other requirements and expectations?

Do educator leaders employ effective strategies for supporting ongoing implementation?

What support do they need to improve use of data and collaborative processes?


Context for Improving SystemsSustaining and scaling-up effective practices requires cooperation between policy and practice. Policy enables implementation of practices and in return practice should inform development of policies. Implementation science research refers to this practice and policy feedback loop as the “PEP/PIP Cycle.” At the core of this feedback loop, is the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycle (see Figure 7). The PDSA cycle emphasizes the importance of ‘study’ and ‘act’ in this loop. Too often, implementation is characterized as plan-do only without data-informed feedback and revision. Through a PDSA cycle, problems and solutions can be identified and barriers to effective implementation reduced. The PDSA cycles consists of four phases.

• Plan: Data-driven identification of barriers and challenges followed by developing a plan for implementation and monitoring outcomes

• Do: Carry out the plan as specified to address the challenges

• Study: Use data identified during the planning phase to assess and track progress

• Act: Make changes to the next iteration of the plan to improve implementation

Policymakers set guidelines, rules, or expectations that affect implementation of practices. Through the PDSA cycle, the implementation steps are planned, enacted, analyzed, and scaled-up. The section on data-informed processes in this Blueprint shows how data is integral to the PDSA cycle. At the stage of analyzing data, policymakers must consider the impact of systems and policies on results and discuss necessary revisions to the implementation process.

Figure 7. Practice Policy Feedback Cycle13

Form Supports Function

Policy

Practice

Structure

Procedure

Policy Plan

Practice

Do

Feed

back

Study -Act

Policy Enabled PracticesPrac

tice

Info

rmed

Pol

icy

Expe

rt Im

plem

enta

tion

Supp

ort

Systems: Context for Improving Systems


Implementation TeamsImplementation teams provide needed support and structure for ensuring implementation with fidelity occurs. In the MMD/DCI framework are two levels of implementation teams: district-level and building-level. Each have roles in guiding and supporting implementation. It is important for districts and buildings to refrain from establishing additional leadership teams for guiding the MMD/DCI implementation. Rather, districts and buildings should reflect on their current team structures and integrate team responsibilities tot he greatest extent possible.

Core competencies of implementation team members, at both the district and building level, include the following.

• Knowledge and understanding of the MMD framework and practices

• Knowledge of expected MMD implementation processes

• Applied experience in using data for improving practices and systems

District Leadership Team

The district leadership team is comprised of district-level administrators, districtwide coaches, curriculum and assessment leaders, professional development coordinators, and other instructional and administrative leaders. This team supports implementation in the following ways.

• Using data to inform district-level policy and evaluate district-level systems

• Providing support for assuring the implementation drivers are addressed within each building

• Providing adaptive and technical solutions essential for sustaining and scaling-up the framework across the district

• Monitoring implementation progress and addressing challenges at the district-level, which affect building-level implementation

• Collaborating with building-leadership teams to gain insight into the effectiveness of implementation and challenges shared across the district

School Building Leadership Team

The building leadership team is comprised of building-level administrators, teacher-leaders, instructional coaches, and other persons integral to the overall building-level system. This team supports implementation in the following ways.





• Using data to inform building-level policy and evaluate building-level systems

• Addressing the implementation drivers in the building context

• Providing adaptive and technical solutions essential for sustaining and scaling-up the MMD framework within the building

• Monitoring implementation progress and addressing challenges at the building-level

• Collaborate with district-leadership teams to share insight into the effectiveness of implementation and challenges occurring in the building

AlignmentEducators are faced with recurring challenges of implementing, sustaining, and evaluating multiple practices, systems, and policies simultaneously. Being purposeful about developing a process for aligning, monitoring alignment, and sustaining alignment is an important function of district-level and building-level leadership. In a recent Technical Guide for Alignment,14 the National Technical Assistance Center on Schoolwide Positive Behavior Supports outlines steps for aligning practices and initiatives. Drawing from this technical guide, the steps below outline a process for reviewing current initiatives and aligning the framework with current practices and systems be shown to be effective for improving student achievement.

1. Assess current initiatives

a. Define the valued outcome to be achieved

b. Develop an inventory of related systems, initiatives, and practices currently implemented across the district

c. Identify the practices and initiatives to be aligned and determine common features

d. Identify the system features supporting the initiative or practice

e. Design a plan for aligned implementation, including collection of data, evaluation, and professional development

2. Adopt formal alignment process

a. Design protocols for considering the adoption of new practices within alignment to current, effective practices

b. Enable a team to monitor the effectiveness of alignment and lead the consideration of new practices as needs arise


"Effective leaders understand that alignment is not something to check off a to-do list. Alignment is a dynamic, ongoing process that requires continual monitoring and realigning as conditions and needs change."

Straw, Davis, Scullard, Kukkonen,

& Franklin (2013)




Implementation Practice Profile & ChecklistThe Implementation Practice Profile and Checklist are tools designed for district level planning for MMD/DCI participation. Organized by the four essential functions of district leadership teams, the checklist provides structure noting current status and indicating next steps.

• Essential Function: District leaders maintain a collaborative culture and climate at the district-level and with building leaders

• Essential Function: District leaders demonstrate commitment to school improvement through participation in coaching, training, and data-driven action to improve instructional practice

• Essential Function: District leaders review district-level and building-level instruction and learning outcomes data and provide support based on data

• Essential Function: District leaders align expectations and requirements across the district in order to improve efficiency, consistency, and effectiveness of instruction

The checklist should be used alongside the Step-by-Step Guide and the District Implementation Pratice Profile.

See Implementation Checklist, p. 68-69


Implementation Practice Profile: District-Level

Essential Function Exemplary Implementation Proficient

Close to Proficient

(Skill is emerging, but not yet to proficiency. Coach-

ing is recommended.)

Far from Proficient

(Follow-up training and coaching are

critical.)

1 District leaders maintain a col-laborative culture and climate at the district-level and with building leaders.

District Leadership Team (DLT) and district contacts address all criteria indicated as proficient.

Participation of DLT in monthly meetings is consistent. The meetings are well-documented examples of proficient imple-mentation.

Communication protocols are consistently followed and shared district wide.

As new DLT members are brought on board, they receive professional development about district-level implementation and district-level roles.

• District-level contact person is identified and acts as the primary contact for reciprocal communication with the Coaching Support Team (CST) facilitator.

• DLT is in place, comprised of members with expertise in the following areas: Instruction, curriculum, assessment, technology, special education, pre-K, elementary, middle, and high school.

• DLT meets monthly to collaborate and shape participation.

• DLT has developed an ongoing partnership with CST.

• Technology (i.e. virtual meetings, document sharing) is used for timely and consistent sharing of information and support from the CST.

Communication protocols result in consistent understanding of participation in all buildings.

• Building-level contacts identified.

• A consistent district-wide plan for communicating with building-level contacts is established.

• Building-level contacts use a protocol to regularly disseminate information to all staff.

DLT collaborates with building leaders to define build-ing-level expectations, develop action plans, collect data, and monitor progress toward improving instruction leading to student learning.

• District-level contact person is identified, but communication and partnership with CST is inconsistent.

• DLT is in place, but not all areas of expertise are represented.

• DLT meets quarterly or less.

• Use of technology is sporadic, if at all.

• Communication protocols are not established.

• Building-level contacts are identified for some buildings, but not all.

• Information about implementation is inconsistently shared with building-level educators.

• Action plans are devel-oped, but have gaps in key components.

• District-level contact person is identified, but communication and partnership with CST does not occur.

• DLT is not in place.

• Technology is not used for sharing informa-tion, meeting, or collaboration.

• Building-level contacts are not identified.

• Information is not shared with building-level educators.

• Action plans are not developed.


Step-By-Step GuideSecond Edition, 2019

Implementation Checklist: District-Level

Focus Action Steps

Current Status (Check 1 level per item)

Planned Focus Areas (Check to identify items for coaching/

support, as needed, in each year)

In place In progressNot

begun Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Mid stage

Early stage

Essential Function: District leaders maintain a collaborative culture and climate at the district-level and with building leaders.

Leadership

1 Form district leadership team (DLT). (see Blueprint for recommended composition)

2 Designate district-level contact person.

3 Designate building-level contact person (for each building in district) who will disseminate information to faculty and staff in the building.

Communication

1 Develop protocol for maintaining ongoing communication with Coaching Support Team Facilitator and CST members, prioritizing the use of virtual technology to increase communication.

2 Develop a district-wide plan for consistent and timely sharing of information with building leaders.

Essential Function: District leaders demonstrate commitment to school improvement through participation in coaching, training, and data-driven action to improve instructional practice.

Commitment

1DLT identify a process for monitoring progress of the implementation progress, including annual goals and outcomes, as well as expectations for educator participation in the virtual learning platform in each of the practice areas.

2 Administer Self-Assessment Practice Profile at least twice each year for practices aligning to PD plan.

3 Administer implementation survey (e.g. Collaborative Work Implementation Survey) at least annually.

4 Use technology to increase the quality and timeliness of coaching for improved instruction.

5 Participate in regional, cadre, and state events to gather insights and wisdom from other districts.


Data Informed ProcessData elements at all stages and levels of implementation can inform sustainability of effective educational practices and influence the design of processes and systems. The data elements include self-assessment, observation, implementation survey, student achievement, and other qualitative data such as artifacts, process documents, and protocols.

Figure 9 (page 38) shows the MMD/DCI data cycle. In this cycle, districts will examine data from school buildings as part of determining a districtwide level of implementation as well as action planning for improved implementation, leading to student achievement.

Practice ProfilesImplementation with fidelity requires clearly described implementation criteria. The Practice Profile framework has been developed by the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) as a way of outlining implementation criteria using a rubric structure with clearly defined practice-level characteristics.15 The Practice Profile template show four levels of implementation and is anchored by the essential functions. The implementation levels are exemplary, proficient, close to proficient, and far from proficient. The Practice Profiles for the components of MMD/DCI are included in the Resources and Tools section of this Blueprint.

How to Use the Practice ProfileThe Practice Profile has multiple uses. Because it provides the educator with concrete examples of implementation, it is a key component of training and coaching on the specific practice. It can also be used for self-monitoring implementation because it serves as a reminder as to the implementation criteria. Practice Profiles can also be used for providing feedback after observation of the practice. Building-level and district leaders can incorporate the use of Practice Profiles into educator evaluation processes. In addition, the Practice Profiles can be used when peer coaching.

Self-Assessment Practice ProfileThe Self-Assessment Practice Profile is an online tool for team-based analysis of Practice Profiles (http://sapp.missouripd.org/instructions). The instructions for using the tool can be found on the webpage. Through this tool, individual educators as well as teams of educators begin by indicating their level of implementation as they complete a questionnaire aligned to each item on the Practice Profiles. Educators can choose to complete

Data: Data Informed Process

See Practice Profiles, p. 48-66


all of the Practice Profiles or select only a few practices. After completing the questionnaire, a dashboard of results is shown and reports can be downloaded. Through the reports, an administrator has a collective view of the Practice Profiles across a team, grade level, or other administrator-determined group of educators.

Collaborative Work Implementation Survey (CWIS)MMD/DCI districts will use the Collaborative Work Implementation Survey (CWIS). The CWIS is a 24-item instrument designed using a five-point Likert scale (see Figure 8 listing the survey items). For three of the scales, the Likert values correspond to frequency, while for the other two, the values correspond to agreement. The survey is intended to measure the degree of implementation of desired processes and practices within participating districts. The scales were designed based upon theoretical knowledge about the most vital information passed from trainers to educators, and practical knowledge of the content of the learning packages delivered through professional coaching by project staff in local school buildings. After a validation process in Spring 2018, items eliciting district level responses were added to the instrument.

Analysis of Implementation ProcessesThe CST will work with district leadership/implementation teams to collect data documenting implementation progress. Data will address implementation of systems change and alignment, professional development received by educators, implementation of practices at district, building, team, and classroom levels, and growth in student achievement.

EvaluationAn evaluation of the MMD/DCI components and processes will be ongoing over the next three years.



SUPPORT & GUIDANCE

INSTRUCTION DESIGN STUDENT LEARNING & FEEDBACK

LEADERSHIP EDUCATOR LEARNING

COLLABORATION TEAMS USE DATA

COLLABORATIVE, DATA-DRIVEN CULTURE

FOCUS ON STUDENT LEARNING

Figure 8. Collaborative Work Implementation Survey (CWIS) for MMD/DCI



Figure 9. Data Cycle

Influencers Data

Coaching support in following areas

• Administra�ve supports• System supports• Training• Performance review & feedback• Teaming & collabora�on• Ongoing evalua�on measures, tools, and processes

Implementa�on processes and protocols

MMD/DCI Components

• Effec�ve educa�onal prac�ces- Collabora�ve teams- Data-based decision making- Common forma�ve assessment

• Effec�ve teaching/learning prac�ces- Developing assessment capable learners + Feedback- Metacogni�on

• School-based implementa�on coaching• Collec�ve teacher efficacy• Becoming an instruc�onal leader of your building

OutcomesIncrease educator knowledge

Improve educator applica�onin district/building se�ng

Full implementa�on withfidelity

Student achievement

• Comprehensivenessof program

• Quality of professional development received

• Administra�ve role• Par�cipant response• District/building

context• Collec�ve teacher/

administrator efficacy

Data collec�on andanalysis• Self-assessment• Observa�on• Implementa�on

survey• Ar�facts, process

documents, and otherqualita�ve data

• Student achievement

For scaling-up and replica�on• What works?• What needs to be revised?• What needs to be added/dropped?• What needs to be reinforced?

Program Review



Professional Learning Modules (PLMs)The MMD/DCI framework uses the professional development approach and materials developed through the Missouri Collaborative Work (CW). The professional development content and processes are aligned with the research on student and adult learning. Research shows that conventional forms of professional development (i.e., one-shot workshops and conferences) do not provide the support needed to modify teaching practices.16 Effective professional development needs to be authentic and ongoing.17 Furthermore, professional development should address adult learning methods to ensure effectiveness through levels of instruction18 (i.e., introduce, illustrate, practice, evaluate, reflect, and master). A ‘professional learning module’ is a focused approach to professional development content that addresses adult learning principles, upholds specific characteristics of high quality professional development, and focuses on implementation at the classroom level.

Table 1. Professional Learning Module (PLM) ComponentsComponent Purpose Example of content

Preparation Provide opportunity for learners to engage in the content prior to the formal training.

Learning objectives. Expectations for the training.Preparatory reading. Reflection exercise.

Opening & introductions

Provide an overview of the day, including reviewing learner objectives, outcomes, and essential questions.

Session at-a-glance. Introductions. Essential questions. Norms. Pre-assessment.

Why the topic is important

Review the basics and relevance to student learning.

Implications for student learning. Ways implementation aligns with MO Learning Standards.

Overview of the topic

Provide learner with core concepts, terms, and vision for implementation.

Core concepts. Glossary of terms. Implementation example.

Support: Professional Development


Component Purpose Example of content

Unpacking the topic

Explore the core components and implementation steps.

Detailed description of the core components. Rationale for components. Detailed implementation steps.

Topic in practice

Provide opportunity for learners to discuss what application in the classroom looks like.

Detailed description of what implementation looks like. Group discussion on what implementation looks like in a variety of contexts. Measuring fidelity. Using data to inform practice.

Topic in action Explore ways for the learners to incorporate the new knowledge and skills into their teaching.

Reflection on what implementation would look like in their classrooms. Discuss and problem-solve potential challenges to implementation and fidelity drift.

Assessment & reflection

Provide opportunity for the learners to reflect on their learning and potential implementation challenges.

Post-assessment learner knowledge. Reflect on personal teaching context and implementation.

Closing & follow-up

Provide opportunity for learner to outline their implementation steps and plans for follow-up coaching.

Template for outlining implementation steps in personal teaching contexts and follow-up coaching. Additional resources for further learning.


Table 1 (continued). Professional Learning Module Components


CSTs provide ongoing contact and support to the MMD/DCI districts. Professionals comprising a CST hold identified expertise in areas of leadership and school culture, academics, social/behavioral, special education, data, technology, assessment, communication, accountability/MSIP, and systems change. CSTs work closely with district leadership teams to support and increase school district capacity in implementation and sustainability of evidence-based educational practices. Through consultation with the CST, training needs may be identified and, if desired, a Regional Professional Development Center (RPDC) called upon to support those training needs.

The professional partnership between the CST and MMD/DCI districts will involve the following.

• Supporting district leadership through the Blueprint for a cohesive, integrated district plan of professional development to deepen implementation of evidence-based educational practices

• Assisting with identifying ways of embedding evidence-based educational practices within district need and context

• Creating, identifying, and sharing effective practices among participating districts

Districts are assigned to a cadre sharing similar demographics. In the 2017-2018 year, there were six cadres of districts (Cohort 1) and each cadre was assigned a CST. The 2018-2019 year adds new districts (Cohort 2) to each of the six cadres. The 2019-2020 year adds new districts and four new cadres, for a total of ten cadres. Providing leadership to each CST is a Lead Facilitator. Districts can expect their primary communication regarding implementation processes and support to be with the CST facilitator. Other members of the CST will be included as specific needs related to their expertise arise.

Regional Professional Development CentersThe nine Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDCs) continue to be a resource for addressing training needs. MMD/DCI partners closely with the RPDC Directors who are integral to the CST process. As the CST and the District identify needs for training, the CST facilitator will reach out to a RPDC consultant holding the needed expertise to provide training.


Coaching Support Teams


Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationThe Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) aims to facilitate the development and implementation of a statewide system of effective evidence-based educational practices to support districts and buildings to achieve exceptional outcomes for all students. To accomplish this task, DESE is partnering with selected districts. Through this partnership between DESE statewide system of support and the selected districts, DESE will provide various supports for active engagement and implementation of the process with fidelity.

To support the involvement of the districts, DESE will provide the following:

• a system for coordination of training and coaching for the districts/buildings within a job-embedded environment;

• a system for development of school-based implementation coaching, at the district and building levels;

• resources and supports to allow the districts/buildings to participate;

• on-site technical assistance and observation visits; and

• opportunities for cross-district collaboration and sharing.



Web-Based ToolsThis section presents three types of tools for guiding professional development, implementation, and use of data. These tools include: DESE Data Platform, Virtual Professional Development Platform, and Self-Assessment Practice Profile.

DESE Data PlatformA robust, DESE-wide data system is currently under development. When mature, this system will tie DESE’s data collection systems such as Core Data, Consultant Log, teacher/leader evaluation, system reviews and tiered monitoring with access for all district staff to online curricula materials, career/technical education supports, common formative assessments, educator evaluation tools, self-assessment tools, PD focusing on leadership, effective teaching and learning, etc. In the future, the plan is to have a “One Stop Shop” which houses all DESE resources in a single location. This “One Stop Shop” should help to provide consistency in data collection and analysis by eliminating the existence of numerous systems with varying expectations acting independently of one another.

Virtual Learning PlatformIn addition to materials that are designed to be delivered in person, there is an online portal called the Virtual Learning Platform (VLP) that provides DESE endorsed, evidence-based training to all PD participants. The materials in the VLP are organized to provide maximum flexibility of access for all individuals or teams of users, from totally self-directed to highly directed and structured. The VLP is available to teachers and school administrators through DESE's Web Application Portal and includes space for user collaboration, pre/post assessments, handouts, worksheets, bookmarking of courses in progress, and other materials required for training. The system can be accessed at any time and may be used as a reference for users once the course(s) are complete. CSTs can provide support to users when accessing the VLP (see Figure 10, p. 44).

Support: Web-Based Tools



Figure 10. Dashboard

The materials in the Virtual Platform are organized to provide maximum flexibility of access for all users, from totally self-directed to highly directed and structured. While the type of user may vary, all users have access to all course materials at any time. The Virtual Platform may be used in a variety of ways. It may be used by individual or groups of learners. A group of learners may or may not be guided by a leader/facilitator. A district/building may decide to learn and implement the content without outside support or organize learning cohorts using an internal facilitator (team leader). For schools desiring more support, RPDC staff is available to provide initial training and/or follow-up coaching and technical assistance activities through contracted services.



Self-Assessment Practice ProfileThe Self-Assessment Practice Profile (SAPP) is a tool designed to help educators self-check implementation levels of newly learned skills and knowledge. Educators submit answers to a questionnaire (see Figure 11 below) aligned with each professional learning module’s Practice Profile (www.sapp.missouripd.org). Questionnaires elicit current levels of knowledge, skills, and abilities for practices included in the framework. When educators submit questionnaire responses, they receive immediate feedback in the form of a shaded practice profile (see Figure 12, p. 46). Shaded practice profiles are collected in the educator’s “Your Assessments” box (see Figure 13, p. 46), making it easy to track individual progress over time.

Building and district leaders access educator responses to build reports in the form of building-level heat maps (see Figure 14, p. 47). Reports can be built for selected teams (grade level, content level), providing a picture of implementation levels across the district. Building reports are collected in the building leaders “Reports” box (see Figure 15, p. 47). Reports should be used for collective planning among all levels of educators. Educators are encouraged to use the SAPP more than once per year to gain insight about collective progress on focus areas. However, the SAPP can be used more frequently as a coaching or reflective tool as needed.

SAPP implementation materials include self-assessment questionnaires aligned with each practice in the content framework, access to individual shaded practice profiles, and access to building-level heat maps.

The SAPP is currently being developed for use in the Virtual Learning Platform.

Figure 11. Teacher Self-Assessment Questionnaire


Figure 12. Teacher Shaded Practice Profile

Figure 13. Teacher "Your Assessments" Box



Figure 14. Building Heat Map

Figure 15. Building "Reports" Box


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Colla

bora

tive

Team

s (CT

)Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1

Educ

ator

s co

llabo

rativ

ely

deve

lop

com

mon

pur

pose

s and

go

als f

or im

prov

ed

stud

ent o

utco

mes

that

em

brac

e co

ntinu

ous

scho

ol im

prov

emen

t.

Team

s add

ress

3/4

of t

he fo

llow

ing

at le

ast t

wic

e m

onth

ly, a

s evi

denc

ed b

y ag

enda

s and

min

utes

:•

Disc

uss d

ata

and

mon

itorin

g st

uden

t pro

gres

s.•

Iden

tify

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s tha

t res

ult i

n st

uden

t lea

rnin

g.•

Iden

tify

stud

ents

nee

ding

rete

achi

ng.

• Al

ign

inst

ructi

onal

pra

ctice

s to

acad

emic

st

anda

rds.

Team

s add

ress

3/4

item

s at

leas

t mon

thly

, as

evid

ence

d by

age

ndas

an

d m

inut

es.

Team

s add

ress

2/4

item

s at

leas

t mon

thly

, as

evid

ence

d by

age

ndas

an

d m

inut

es.

Team

s add

ress

few

er

than

2/4

item

s at l

east

m

onth

ly, a

s evi

denc

ed b

y ag

enda

s and

min

utes

.

2

Educ

ator

s effe

ctive

ly

impl

emen

t gro

up

proc

esse

s in

colla

bora

tive

mee

tings

.

Team

s mee

t wee

kly

usin

g ag

enda

and

min

utes

in

colla

bora

tive

mee

tings

.Te

ams m

eet a

t lea

st

mon

thly

usin

g ag

enda

s an

d m

inut

es in

co

llabo

rativ

e m

eetin

gs.

Team

s mee

t reg

ular

ly b

ut

with

no

set s

ched

ule.

Team

mee

tings

tim

es

are

irreg

ular

, inf

requ

ent,

and/

or o

ften

canc

eled

.

Team

s use

age

ndas

whi

ch in

clud

e 8/

9 of

the

follo

win

g re

com

men

ded

item

s:•

Team

/gro

up n

ame.

• Da

te/ti

me/

loca

tion.

• O

utco

mes

(inc

lude

s req

uire

d m

ater

ials)

.•

Past

item

s to

revi

ew.

• N

ew it

ems.

• Ce

lebr

ation

s.•

Nor

ms.

• Ro

les.

• N

ext m

eetin

g da

te.

Team

s use

age

ndas

w

hich

incl

ude

7/9

of

reco

mm

ende

d ite

ms.

Team

s use

age

ndas

w

hich

incl

ude

at le

ast

4/9

of re

com

men

ded

item

s.

Team

s use

age

ndas

w

hich

incl

ude

few

er th

an

4/9

of re

com

men

ded

item

s are

not

dev

elop

ed.

Support: Practice Profiles

p. 4

9Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

2

(con

tinue

d) E

duca

tors

eff

ectiv

ely

impl

emen

t gr

oup

proc

esse

s in

colla

bora

tive

mee

tings

.

Team

s use

min

utes

and

com

mun

icati

on th

at

addr

ess 8

/9 o

f the

follo

win

g re

com

men

datio

ns:

• Pu

rpos

e fo

r the

mee

ting.

• W

here

and

whe

n he

ld.

• Li

st o

f the

atte

ndee

s.•

Task

s ach

ieve

d du

ring

the

mee

ting.

• De

cisio

ns m

ade

at th

e m

eetin

g.•

List

of a

ction

s agr

eed

upon

incl

udin

g to

who

m

it w

as a

ssig

ned

and

the

com

pleti

on d

ate.

• N

otes

are

cen

tral

ly st

ored

with

eas

y ac

cess

fo

r all

parti

cipa

nts t

o pr

ovid

e up

date

s and

co

mm

ents

.•

Agen

das t

hat u

se a

con

siste

nt te

mpl

ate

for

easy

refe

renc

e.•

Agen

das d

istrib

uted

to a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs.

Team

s use

min

utes

an

d co

mm

unic

ation

th

at a

ddre

ss 7

/9 o

f the

re

com

men

datio

ns.

Team

s use

min

utes

and

co

mm

unic

ation

that

ad

dres

s at l

east

4/9

of

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

.

Team

s use

min

utes

and

co

mm

unic

ation

that

ad

dres

s few

er th

an 4

/9

of th

e re

com

men

datio

ns

or a

re n

ot d

evel

oped

.

3

Educ

ator

s int

entio

nally

us

e co

llabo

rativ

e sk

ills

in c

olla

bora

tive

team

m

eetin

gs.

Durin

g te

am m

eetin

gs, p

robl

em-s

olvi

ng a

nd

shar

ing

invo

lves

at l

east

6/7

of t

he fo

llow

ing

colla

bora

tive

beha

vior

s:•

Paus

ing.

• Pa

raph

rasin

g.•

Posin

g qu

estio

ns.

• Pu

tting

idea

s on

the

tabl

e.•

Prov

idin

g da

ta.

• Pa

ying

atte

ntion

to se

lf an

d ot

hers

.•

Pres

umin

g po

sitive

inte

ntion

s.

Durin

g te

am m

eetin

gs,

prob

lem

-sol

ving

and

sh

arin

g in

volv

es a

t le

ast 5

/7 c

olla

bora

tive

beha

vior

s.

Durin

g te

am m

eetin

gs,

prob

lem

-sol

ving

an

d sh

arin

g in

volv

es

few

er th

an 5

/7 o

f th

e re

com

men

ded

colla

bora

tive

beha

vior

s.

The

colla

bora

tive

beha

vior

s do

not o

ccur

du

ring

team

mee

tings

.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Support: Practice ProfilesDa

ta-B

ased

Dec

isio

n M

akin

g Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

yet

to

pro

ficie

ncy.

Coa

chin

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

prof

essio

nal

deve

lopm

ent a

nd

coac

hing

are

criti

cal.)

1Ed

ucat

ors

esta

blish

co

llabo

rativ

e pr

oces

s for

co

llecti

ng

data

.

Mee

t 9/9

crit

eria

.

Colla

bora

tive

data

team

pro

cess

• Es

tabl

ish a

dat

a te

am w

ith m

embe

rs sh

arin

g a

com

mon

inte

rest

(con

tent

, gra

de le

vel,

etc.

).•

Mee

t at r

egul

arly

sche

dule

d pr

edet

erm

ined

tim

es to

col

labo

rate

on

stud

ent d

ata.

•

Defin

e an

d us

e ro

les t

o im

prov

e m

eetin

g eff

ectiv

enes

s and

effi

cien

cy.

• U

se a

gend

as th

at c

lear

ly o

utlin

e te

am m

eetin

g go

als w

ith a

n em

phas

is on

usin

g da

ta to

in

form

inst

ructi

on.

• U

se a

syst

em fo

r sha

ring

and

stor

ing

team

do

cum

ents

(i.e

. age

nda,

min

utes

, etc

.).

• Ho

ld te

am a

ccou

ntab

le fo

r ind

ivid

ual a

nd

team

revi

ew o

f dat

a

Data

col

lecti

on p

roce

ss

• Co

llect

stud

ent d

ata

in re

latio

n to

lear

ning

ta

rget

s.•

Colle

ct d

ata

desc

ribin

g in

stru

ction

al p

roce

sses

.•

Org

anize

dat

a in

pre

para

tion

for r

evie

w a

nd

anal

ysis.

7/9

crite

ria a

re m

et.

Colla

bora

tive

data

team

pro

cess

• Es

tabl

ish a

dat

a te

am w

ith m

embe

rs

shar

ing

a co

mm

on in

tere

st (c

onte

nt,

grad

e le

vel,

etc.

).•

Mee

t at r

egul

arly

sche

dule

d pr

edet

erm

ined

tim

es to

col

labo

rate

on

stud

ent d

ata.

• De

fine

and

use

role

s to

impr

ove

mee

ting

effec

tiven

ess a

nd e

ffici

ency

. •

Use

age

ndas

that

cle

arly

out

line

team

m

eetin

g go

als w

ith a

n em

phas

is on

us

ing

data

to in

form

inst

ructi

on.

Data

col

lecti

on p

roce

ss

• Co

llect

stud

ent d

ata

in re

latio

n to

le

arni

ng ta

rget

s.•

Colle

ct d

ata

desc

ribin

g in

stru

ction

al

proc

esse

s.•

Org

anize

dat

a in

pre

para

tion

for r

evie

w

and

anal

ysis.

4/9

crite

ria a

re m

et.

Colla

bora

tive

data

team

pro

cess

• Es

tabl

ish a

dat

a te

am w

ith m

embe

rs

shar

ing

a co

mm

on in

tere

st (c

onte

nt,

grad

e le

vel,

etc.

).•

Mee

t at r

egul

arly

sche

dule

d pr

edet

erm

ined

tim

es to

col

labo

rate

on

stud

ent d

ata.

• U

se a

gend

as th

at c

lear

ly o

utlin

e te

am m

eetin

g go

als w

ith a

n em

phas

is on

usin

g da

ta to

info

rm

inst

ructi

on.

Data

col

lecti

on p

roce

ss

• Co

llect

stud

ent d

ata

in re

latio

n to

le

arni

ng ta

rget

s.

Few

er th

an 4

/9 o

f an

y of

the

crite

ria

occu

r.

2Ed

ucat

ors

impl

emen

t a

proc

ess f

or

exam

inin

g an

d in

terp

retin

g da

ta.

Mee

t 6/6

crit

eria

.

• U

se p

urpo

sefu

l dat

a an

alys

is sy

stem

to g

uide

eff

ectiv

e da

ta a

naly

sis.

• Co

nsist

ently

use

pro

toco

l for

dat

a an

alys

is.•

Iden

tify

a co

mm

on p

robl

em th

at is

rela

ted

to

a le

arni

ng g

oal.

• Re

flect

on

how

inst

ructi

on h

as p

revi

ously

im

pact

ed th

e co

mm

on p

robl

em.

• Pr

edic

t a li

nk to

teac

her p

racti

ce.

• O

rgan

ize a

nd tr

ack

the

data

-info

rmed

de

cisio

ns m

ade

by th

e te

am in

ord

er to

be

ava

ilabl

e fo

r fut

ure

prob

lem

-sol

ving

di

scus

sions

.

5/6

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• U

se p

urpo

sefu

l dat

a an

alys

is sy

stem

to

guid

e eff

ectiv

e da

ta a

naly

sis.

• Co

nsist

ently

use

pro

toco

l for

dat

a an

alys

is.•

Iden

tify

a co

mm

on p

robl

em th

at is

re

late

d to

a le

arni

ng g

oal.

• Re

flect

on

how

inst

ructi

on h

as

prev

ious

ly im

pact

ed th

e co

mm

on

prob

lem

. •

Pred

ict a

link

to te

ache

r pra

ctice

.

4/6

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• U

se p

urpo

sefu

l dat

a an

alys

is sy

stem

to

gui

de e

ffecti

ve d

ata

anal

ysis.

• Co

nsist

ently

use

pro

toco

l for

da

ta a

naly

sis.

• Id

entif

y a

com

mon

pro

blem

that

is

rela

ted

to a

lear

ning

goa

l. •

Refle

ct o

n ho

w in

stru

ction

has

pr

evio

usly

impa

cted

the

com

mon

pr

oble

m.

Few

er th

an 4

/6 o

f an

y of

the

crite

ria

occu

r.

p. 5

1Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9


3Ed

ucat

ors

dete

rmin

e in

stru

ction

al

actio

n st

eps.

Mee

t 5/5

crit

eria

.

• De

velo

p a

writt

en in

stru

ction

al a

ction

pla

n (IA

P) in

clud

ing

all p

arts

: Lea

rnin

g Go

al,

Evid

ence

of L

earn

ing,

Inst

ructi

onal

Cha

nge,

M

etho

d fo

r Exa

min

ing

Inst

ructi

on, a

nd Im

pact

An

alys

is.•

Desig

n a

less

on o

r set

of l

esso

ns a

ddre

ssin

g th

e le

arni

ng g

oal.

• Sc

hedu

le a

nd d

eliv

er in

stru

ction

al c

hang

e (le

sson

or s

et o

f les

sons

).•

Colle

ct e

vide

nce

of le

arni

ng o

utlin

ed in

the

IAP.

• O

utlin

e ho

w e

ngag

ing

stud

ents

in re

view

of

lear

ning

dat

a w

ill in

form

des

ign

or d

eliv

ery

of

inst

ructi

onal

cha

nge.

4/5

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• De

velo

p a

writt

en in

stru

ction

al

actio

n pl

an (I

AP) i

nclu

ding

all

part

s: L

earn

ing

Goal

, Evi

denc

e of

Le

arni

ng, I

nstr

uctio

nal C

hang

e,

Met

hod

for E

xam

inin

g In

stru

ction

, an

d Im

pact

Ana

lysis

.•

Desig

n a

less

on o

r set

of l

esso

ns

addr

essin

g th

e le

arni

ng g

oal.

• Sc

hedu

le a

nd d

eliv

er in

stru

ction

al

chan

ge (l

esso

n or

set o

f les

sons

).•

Colle

ct e

vide

nce

of le

arni

ng

outli

ned

in th

e IA

P.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• De

velo

p a

writt

en in

stru

ction

al

actio

n pl

an (I

AP) i

nclu

ding

all

part

s:

Lear

ning

Goa

l, Ev

iden

ce o

f Lea

rnin

g,

Inst

ructi

onal

Cha

nge,

Met

hod

for

Exam

inin

g In

stru

ction

, and

Impa

ct

Anal

ysis.

• De

sign

a le

sson

or s

et o

f les

sons

ad

dres

sing

the

lear

ning

goa

l.•

Sche

dule

and

del

iver

inst

ructi

onal

ch

ange

(les

son

or se

t of l

esso

ns).

Few

er th

an 3

/5 o

f an

y of

the

crite

ria

occu

r.

4Ed

ucat

ors

use

and

act

upon

dat

a by

in

corp

orat

-in

g te

achi

ng

and

lear

ning

da

ta in

to

inst

ructi

on

and

adju

sting

in

stru

ction

ac

cord

ingl

y.

Mee

t 7/7

crite

ria.

• Re

view

pre

viou

sly c

reat

ed d

ata

anal

ysis

syst

em a

nd im

prov

e it

as n

eces

sary

to

dete

rmin

e in

stru

ction

al im

pact

.•

Anal

yze

evid

ence

of l

earn

ing

colle

cted

dur

ing

inst

ructi

onal

cha

nge.

• In

clud

e tim

e in

dat

a te

am m

eetin

gs to

refle

ct

on a

nd d

iscus

s wha

t wor

ked,

wha

t did

not

w

ork

and

why

.•

Dete

rmin

e if/

how

inst

ructi

onal

cha

nge

targ

eted

stud

ent l

earn

ing

goal

.•

Inco

rpor

ate

revi

ew o

f stu

dent

dat

a in

to

inst

ructi

on a

nd g

ain

feed

back

on

stud

ent

lear

ning

from

stud

ents

. •

Sche

dule

tim

e to

refle

ct o

n th

e ou

tcom

e of

th

e in

stru

ction

al c

hang

e.•

Adju

st in

stru

ction

al a

ction

pla

n to

refle

ct

findi

ngs.

6/7

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• Re

view

pre

viou

sly c

reat

ed d

ata

anal

ysis

syst

em a

nd im

prov

e it

as n

eces

sary

to

dete

rmin

e in

stru

ction

al im

pact

.•

Anal

yze

evid

ence

of l

earn

ing

colle

cted

du

ring

inst

ructi

onal

cha

nge.

• In

clud

e tim

e in

dat

a te

am m

eetin

gs to

re

flect

on

and

disc

uss w

hat w

orke

d,

wha

t did

not

wor

k an

d w

hy.

• De

term

ine

if/ho

w in

stru

ction

al c

hang

e ta

rget

ed st

uden

t lea

rnin

g go

al.

• In

corp

orat

e re

view

of s

tude

nt d

ata

into

inst

ructi

on a

nd g

ain

feed

back

on

stud

ent l

earn

ing

from

stud

ents

. •

Sche

dule

tim

e to

refle

ct o

n th

e ou

tcom

e of

the

inst

ructi

onal

cha

nge.

4/7

crite

ria a

re m

et.

• Re

view

pre

viou

sly c

reat

ed d

ata

anal

ysis

syst

em a

nd im

prov

e it

as

nece

ssar

y to

det

erm

ine

inst

ructi

onal

im

pact

.•

Anal

yze

evid

ence

of l

earn

ing

colle

cted

dur

ing

inst

ructi

onal

ch

ange

.•

Incl

ude

time

in d

ata

team

mee

tings

to

refle

ct o

n an

d di

scus

s wha

t w

orke

d, w

hat d

id n

ot w

ork

and

why

.•

Dete

rmin

e if/

how

inst

ructi

onal

ch

ange

targ

eted

stud

ent l

earn

ing

goal

.

Few

er th

an 4

/7 o

f an

y of

the

crite

ria

occu

r.

Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Com

mon

For

mati

ve A

sses

smen

t (CF

A)Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1

Educ

ator

s dev

elop

cl

ear a

nd m

eani

ngfu

l le

arni

ng ta

rget

s to

guid

e in

stru

ction

and

st

uden

t lea

rnin

g.

Lear

ning

targ

ets a

re d

evel

oped

that

mee

t 5/6

cr

iteria

:•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cle

arly

con

nect

ed to

ess

entia

l le

arni

ng in

the

dom

ain.

• Le

arni

ng ta

rget

dev

elop

s dee

p un

ders

tand

ing

of u

nder

lyin

g co

ncep

ts a

nd/o

r acq

uisiti

on o

f sk

ills.

• Le

arni

ng ta

rget

cle

arly

eng

ages

hig

her o

rder

th

inki

ng p

roce

sses

.•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cle

arly

man

agea

ble

and

can

be a

ccom

plish

ed in

the

cour

se o

f a le

sson

or

unit

(may

be

seve

ral p

erio

ds).

• Le

arni

ng ta

rget

is c

lear

ly e

xpla

ined

to st

uden

ts.

• Co

nnec

tions

bet

wee

n cu

rren

t lea

rnin

g ta

rget

an

d pr

ior l

earn

ing

are

clea

rly m

ade.

4/6

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cl

early

con

nect

ed to

es

senti

al le

arni

ng in

th

e do

mai

n.

3/6

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Lear

ning

targ

et is

cl

early

con

nect

ed to

es

senti

al le

arni

ng in

th

e do

mai

n.

Few

er th

an 3

/6 c

riter

ia

are

met

.

2

Educ

ator

s est

ablis

h cl

ear a

nd m

easu

rabl

e st

uden

t suc

cess

crit

eria

in

a ru

bric

, sco

ring

guid

e, o

r che

cklis

t.

Esta

blish

cle

ar a

nd m

easu

rabl

e st

uden

t suc

cess

cr

iteria

that

mee

t 4/5

crit

eria

:•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia a

re c

lear

ly a

nd e

ffecti

vely

al

igne

d to

lear

ning

targ

ets.

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

cle

arly

and

effe

ctive

ly re

late

to

wha

t stu

dent

s will

say,

do, m

ake,

or w

rite

to

show

evi

denc

e of

lear

ning

.•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia c

lear

ly a

nd e

ffecti

vely

refle

ct

way

s for

stud

ents

to in

dica

te th

eir c

urre

nt

stat

us re

lativ

e to

the

lear

ning

targ

ets.

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

are

com

mun

icat

ed in

lang

uage

st

uden

ts c

an fu

lly u

nder

stan

d.•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia a

re fr

eque

ntly

refe

rred

to

durin

g th

e le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia a

re

clea

rly a

nd e

ffecti

vely

al

igne

d to

lear

ning

ta

rget

s.•

Succ

ess c

riter

ia c

lear

ly

and

effec

tivel

y re

late

to

wha

t stu

dent

s will

sa

y, do

, mak

e, o

r writ

e to

show

evi

denc

e of

le

arni

ng.

The

follo

win

g cr

iteria

are

m

et:

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

are

cl

early

and

effe

ctive

ly

alig

ned

to le

arni

ng

targ

ets.

• Su

cces

s crit

eria

cle

arly

an

d eff

ectiv

ely

rela

te

to w

hat s

tude

nts w

ill

say,

do, m

ake,

or w

rite

to sh

ow e

vide

nce

of

lear

ning

.

Few

er th

an 2

/5 o

f the

cr

iteria

are

met

.


p. 5

3Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

3

Educ

ator

s con

stru

ct

and/

or u

se q

ualit

y as

sess

men

t ins

trum

ents

w

hich

are

of s

ound

de

sign

and

mea

sure

the

lear

ning

targ

ets.

Qua

lity

asse

ssm

ent i

nstr

umen

ts m

eet 4

/5

crite

ria:

Form

ative

ass

essm

ents

:•

Are

used

to c

olle

ct d

ata

on st

uden

t lea

rnin

g du

ring

the

lear

ning

pro

cess

.•

Are

fully

alig

ned

with

the

lear

ning

targ

et a

nd

succ

ess c

riter

ia.

• Ar

e cl

early

app

ropr

iate

for t

he p

urpo

se o

f ge

nera

ting

data

in re

latio

n to

the

succ

ess

crite

ria.

• Ar

e co

nsist

ently

and

stra

tegi

cally

pla

ced

durin

g th

e co

urse

of t

he le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

• Pr

ovid

e op

port

uniti

es fo

r stu

dent

s to

clea

rly

show

“w

here

am

I no

w”

in re

latio

n to

mas

tery

of

the

lear

ning

targ

et.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Form

ative

ass

essm

ents

ar

e us

ed to

col

lect

da

ta o

n st

uden

t le

arni

ng d

urin

g th

e le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

2/5

crite

ria a

re m

et

incl

udin

g:•

Form

ative

ass

essm

ents

ar

e us

ed to

col

lect

dat

a on

stud

ent l

earn

ing

durin

g th

e le

arni

ng

proc

ess.

Few

er th

an 2

/5 o

f the

cr

iteria

are

met

.

4

Educ

ator

s use

as

sess

men

t dat

a to

impr

ove

stud

ent

lear

ning

.

Asse

ssm

ent d

ata

is us

ed to

impr

ove

stud

ent

lear

ning

and

mee

ts 3

/3 c

riter

ia:

• Th

e te

ache

r’s d

ecisi

ons a

bout

nex

t ste

ps a

re

com

plet

ely

base

d on

evi

denc

e.•

The

teac

her t

akes

cle

arly

app

ropr

iate

acti

on

base

d on

evi

denc

e (e

.g.,

to c

ontin

ue a

s pl

anne

d, sc

affol

d, g

ive

stud

ent f

eedb

ack,

sh

ift fo

cus)

.•

The

teac

her f

eedb

ack

to st

uden

ts is

cle

arly

al

igne

d w

ith th

e le

arni

ng ta

rget

and

succ

ess

crite

ria.

2/3

of th

e cr

iteria

are

m

et in

clud

ing:

• Th

e te

ache

r’s d

ecisi

ons

abou

t nex

t ste

ps a

re

com

plet

ely

base

d on

ev

iden

ce.

The

follo

win

g cr

iterio

n is

met

:•

The

teac

her’s

dec

ision

s ab

out n

ext s

teps

are

co

mpl

etel

y ba

sed

on

evid

ence

.

No

crite

ria a

re m

et.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Deve

lopi

ng A

sses

smen

t Cap

able

Lea

rner

sPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1Ed

ucat

ors t

each

st

uden

ts to

det

erm

ine,

“W

here

am

I Go

ing?

”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

dev

elop

lear

ning

go

als,

5/5

crit

eria

occ

ur:

Educ

ator

:•

Writ

es d

aily

targ

ets u

sing

stud

ent-f

riend

ly

lang

uage

, usin

g “I

can

___

____

___”

or “

I kno

w

____

____

__”

stat

emen

ts.

• Cr

eate

s dai

ly o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or st

uden

ts to

use

or

inte

ract

with

lear

ning

targ

ets.

• De

velo

ps ru

bric

or s

corin

g gu

ide

for

appr

opria

te a

ssig

nmen

ts a

nd p

rovi

des m

ultip

le

oppo

rtun

ities

for s

tude

nts t

o us

e/in

tera

ct w

ith

the

rubr

ic/s

corin

g gu

ide

durin

g th

e le

arni

ng.

• An

alyz

es sa

mpl

e w

ork

with

the

stud

ents

usin

g st

rong

and

wea

k ex

ampl

es a

nd a

skin

g st

uden

ts

to ju

stify

thei

r ana

lyse

s (an

on-

goin

g ta

sk

thro

ugho

ut le

arni

ng to

cla

rify

misc

once

ption

s).

• As

ks st

uden

ts to

set d

aily

goa

ls in

rela

tion

to

the

lear

ning

targ

ets.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e le

arni

ng

goal

s, 4

/5 c

riter

ia o

ccur

an

d m

ust i

nclu

de:

Educ

ator

: •

Writ

es d

aily

targ

ets

usin

g st

uden

t-frie

ndly

la

ngua

ge, u

sing

“I

can_

____

__”

or

“I k

now

___

___”

st

atem

ents

.•

Crea

tes d

aily

op

port

uniti

es fo

r st

uden

ts to

use

or

inte

ract

with

lear

ning

ta

rget

s.•

Asks

stud

ents

to se

t da

ily g

oals

in re

latio

n to

the

lear

ning

targ

ets.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e le

arni

ng

goal

s, 3

/5 c

riter

ia o

ccur

an

d m

ust i

nclu

de:

Educ

ator

:•

Writ

es d

aily

targ

ets

usin

g st

uden

t-frie

ndly

la

ngua

ge, u

sing

“I c

an

____

___”

or “

I kno

w

____

___”

stat

emen

ts.

• Cr

eate

s dai

ly

oppo

rtun

ities

for

stud

ents

to u

se o

r in

tera

ct w

ith le

arni

ng

targ

ets.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to d

eter

min

e le

arni

ng

goal

s, fe

wer

than

3/5

cr

iteria

occ

ur.


p. 5

5Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

2Ed

ucat

ors t

each

st

uden

ts to

det

erm

ine,

“W

here

am

I N

ow?”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

self-

eval

uate

lear

ning

pr

ogre

ss, 5

/5 c

riter

ia o

ccur

: Ed

ucat

or:

• Pr

ovid

es d

escr

iptiv

e ta

sk fe

edba

ck to

all

stud

ents

thro

ugho

ut th

eir l

earn

ing

that

cle

arly

lin

ks to

lear

ning

goa

l and

succ

ess c

riter

ia.

• Pr

ovid

es fe

edba

ck a

bout

stre

ngth

s and

offe

rs

info

rmati

on to

gui

de a

ction

able

impr

ovem

ent

to a

ll st

uden

ts m

ultip

le ti

mes

thro

ugho

ut th

e le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

• Pa

ces i

nstr

uctio

n to

allo

w fo

r fre

quen

t, de

scrip

tive

feed

back

to a

ll st

uden

ts a

nd a

llow

s tim

e fo

r stu

dent

s to

act o

n th

e fe

edba

ck

rece

ived

.•

Asks

stud

ents

to se

lf-re

gula

te b

y as

sess

ing

thei

r ow

n pr

ogre

ss a

nd ju

stify

ing

thei

r ass

essm

ents

m

ultip

le ti

mes

thro

ugho

ut th

e le

arni

ng p

roce

ss.

• In

stru

cts s

tude

nts t

o se

t per

sona

l goa

ls ba

sed

on fe

edba

ck a

nd se

lf-as

sess

men

t.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to se

lf-ev

alua

te le

arni

ng

prog

ress

, 4/5

crit

eria

oc

cur.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to se

lf-ev

alua

te le

arni

ng

prog

ress

, 3/5

crit

eria

oc

cur.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to se

lf-ev

alua

te le

arni

ng

prog

ress

, few

er th

an 3

/5

crite

ria o

ccur

.

3

Educ

ator

s tea

ch

stud

ents

to d

eter

min

e,

“How

do

I Clo

se th

e Ga

p?”

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts to

iden

tify

next

step

s in

lear

ning

, 4/4

crit

eria

occ

ur:

Educ

ator

:•

Assis

ts e

ach

stud

ent i

n de

term

inin

g w

hat m

ight

be

som

e of

the

next

inst

ructi

onal

step

s for

the

indi

vidu

al.

• Pa

ces i

nstr

uctio

n to

allo

w fo

r the

feed

back

loop

an

d fo

cuse

d st

uden

t rev

ision

.•

Prov

ides

opp

ortu

nitie

s for

stud

ents

to se

lf-re

flect

and

doc

umen

t the

ir le

arni

ng.

• Pr

ovid

es o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or st

uden

ts to

shar

e th

eir l

earn

ing.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps

in le

arni

ng, 3

/4 c

riter

ia

occu

r.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps

in le

arni

ng, 2

/4 c

riter

ia

occu

r.

Whe

n te

achi

ng st

uden

ts

to id

entif

y ne

xt st

eps i

n le

arni

ng, f

ewer

than

2/4

cr

iteria

occ

ur.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Met

acog

nitio

nPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1De

velo

ping

m

etac

ogni

tion

in

lear

ners

.

Whe

n de

velo

ping

met

acog

nitio

n in

lear

ners

5/5

cr

iteria

are

met

:•

Whe

n pr

esen

ting

stud

ents

with

a ta

sk,

the

teac

her p

rom

otes

a m

etac

ogni

tive

envi

ronm

ent b

y ta

lkin

g ab

out t

hink

ing

and

lear

ning

in g

ener

al a

nd sp

ecifi

cally

talk

ing

abou

t one

’s ow

n th

inki

ng a

nd le

arni

ng.

• W

hen

pres

entin

g st

uden

ts w

ith a

task

, the

te

ache

r mod

els m

etac

ogni

tive

prac

tices

bef

ore,

du

ring,

and

afte

r lea

rnin

g.

• W

hen

pres

entin

g st

uden

ts w

ith a

task

, the

te

ache

r pro

vide

s opp

ortu

nity

for s

tude

nts t

o th

ink

abou

t the

bes

t way

to a

ppro

ach

the

task

or

acc

ompl

ish th

e le

arni

ng ta

rget

and

con

nect

to

prio

r exp

erie

nces

. •

Whe

n pr

esen

ting

stud

ents

with

a ta

sk, t

he

teac

her p

rovi

des o

ppor

tuni

ty fo

r stu

dent

s to

mon

itor p

rogr

ess i

n re

latio

n to

lear

ning

targ

et

and

succ

ess c

riter

ia.

• W

hen

pres

entin

g st

uden

ts w

ith a

task

, the

te

ache

r pro

vide

s stu

dent

s opp

ortu

nity

to

dete

rmin

e if

lear

ning

targ

et w

as m

et a

nd

refle

ct o

n w

hat w

ent w

ell w

hat d

id n

ot g

o w

ell

and

wha

t to

do d

iffer

ently

nex

t tim

e.

4/5

crite

ria a

re m

et.

3/5

crite

ria a

re m

et.

Few

er th

an 3

/5 c

riter

ia

are

met

.


p. 5

7Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Scho

ol-B

ased

Impl

emen

tatio

n Co

achi

ngPr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1

Educ

ator

s de

velo

p an

d m

aint

ain

coac

hing

re

latio

nshi

ps.

Mee

t 5/5

crit

eria

for d

evel

opin

g an

d m

aint

aini

ng

coac

hing

rela

tions

hips

:•

Crea

te re

cipr

ocal

par

tner

ship

s.•

Com

mun

icat

e ab

out c

oach

ing

purp

ose

and

prac

tices

.•

Allo

w te

ache

rs to

iden

tify

need

s and

to c

hoos

e co

achi

ng su

ppor

t. •

Ackn

owle

dge

and

addr

ess d

iffer

ence

s.•

Build

teac

her l

eade

rshi

p ca

paci

ty.

Mee

t 4/5

crit

eria

.M

eet 3

/5 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 3

/5 c

riter

ia.

2Ed

ucat

ors

prov

ide

effec

tive

feed

back

.

Effec

tive

feed

back

pro

vide

d by

edu

cato

rs m

eets

6/6

cr

iteria

:•

Prov

ide

info

rmal

pos

itive

feed

back

imm

edia

tely

afte

r th

e se

ssio

n.•

Use

spec

ific,

des

crip

tive,

and

acti

onab

le v

erba

l fe

edba

ck.

• U

se sp

ecifi

c, d

escr

iptiv

e, a

nd a

ction

able

writt

en

feed

back

.•

Star

t with

pos

itive

feed

back

focu

sing

on sp

ecifi

c ex

ampl

es th

at in

dica

te st

reng

ths o

f pra

ctice

.•

Reaffi

rm th

e po

sitive

and

then

mut

ually

add

ress

gr

owth

ele

men

ts w

ith sp

ecifi

c la

ngua

ge a

nd e

xam

ples

.•

Cele

brat

e gr

owth

with

in th

e pr

actic

es.

Mee

t 5/6

crit

eria

.M

eet 4

/6 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 4

/6 c

riter

ia.

3

Educ

ator

s de

velo

p a

stra

tegi

c an

d di

ffere

ntiat

ed

coac

hing

pla

n.

Coac

hing

pla

ns d

evel

oped

by

educ

ator

mee

t 5/5

crit

eria

:•

Alig

n co

achi

ng p

lan

focu

s to

scho

ol b

uild

ing/

dist

rict

visio

n an

d go

als.

• Su

ppor

t edu

cato

rs in

self-

asse

ssm

ent u

sing

the

Prac

tice

Profi

le o

f the

effe

ctive

edu

catio

nal p

racti

ce(s

).•

Supp

ort e

duca

tors

in d

evel

opm

ent o

f gro

wth

goa

l.•

Esta

blish

met

hods

of d

ata

colle

ction

for i

ndic

ator

s of

prog

ress

.•

Shar

e a

plan

for g

radu

al re

leas

e of

resp

onsib

ility

.

Mee

t 4/5

crit

eria

.M

eet 3

/5 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 3

/5 c

riter

ia.


p. 5

9Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

4Ed

ucat

ors

use

solu

tion

dial

ogue

.

Solu

tion

dial

ogue

incl

udes

7/7

crit

eria

:•

Faci

litat

e co

nver

satio

n ab

out w

hat h

as g

one

wel

l and

w

here

mor

e su

ppor

t is n

eede

d.•

Faci

litat

e co

nver

satio

n ab

out r

elev

ant d

ata.

• Re

spon

d to

idea

s for

impr

ovem

ent b

y va

lidati

ng,

addi

ng su

gges

tions

, and

pro

vidi

ng ra

tiona

le fo

r ch

ange

s in

prac

tice.

• Su

ppor

t sug

gesti

ons f

or c

hang

e in

pra

ctice

by

mod

elin

g ex

ampl

es o

f the

con

tent

/pra

ctice

in u

se.

• Pr

ovid

e op

port

unity

for r

eflec

tion

and

clar

ifica

tion

of

reco

mm

enda

tions

.•

Offe

r opp

ortu

nity

or r

esou

rces

for g

uide

d pr

actic

e.•

Faci

litat

e id

entif

ying

nex

t ste

ps.

Incl

udes

6/7

crit

eria

.In

clud

es 5

/7 c

riter

ia.

Incl

udes

4/7

crit

eria

.

5

Educ

ator

s pr

ogre

ss m

onito

r im

plem

enta

tion

of e

ffecti

ve

educ

ation

al

prac

tices

.

Mee

t all

3/3

crite

ria a

nd u

se fo

ur m

odes

of g

athe

ring

evid

ence

.•

Gath

er e

vide

nce

to m

onito

r pro

gres

s tow

ard

grow

th

goal

pla

n us

ing

four

mod

es.

�O

bser

vatio

n. �Vi

deo

reco

rdin

g th

emse

lves

. �St

uden

t evi

denc

e (c

lass

room

disc

ours

e, st

uden

t w

ork)

. �Jo

urna

ling.

• Re

flect

on

evid

ence

to d

eter

min

e gr

owth

tow

ard

goal

.•

Dete

rmin

e ne

xt st

eps.

Mee

t 3/3

crit

eria

.M

eet 2

/3 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 2

/3 c

riter

ia.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019


Colle

ctive

Tea

cher

Effi

cacy

(CTE

) Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y

Impl

emen

tatio

nPr

ofici

ent

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

ing

is re

com

men

ded.

)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1

Dist

rict/

Build

ing

lead

ers

prov

ide

oppo

rtun

ities

for

teac

hers

to e

xper

ienc

e th

e fo

ur so

urce

s of e

ffica

cy,

and

teac

hers

hav

e a

com

bine

d be

lief t

hat t

hey

have

a m

ajor

impa

ct o

n st

uden

t lea

rnin

g.

85%

of t

each

ers r

epor

t tha

t with

in th

e la

st 1

2 m

onth

s, th

ey h

ave

met

5 c

riter

ia fo

r effi

cacy

.

• Th

ey h

ave

succ

essf

ully

impl

emen

ted

a ne

w in

stru

ction

al st

rate

gy o

r pr

actic

e le

arne

d in

trai

ning

(affe

ctive

stat

e).

• Th

ey h

ave

rece

ived

feed

back

and

enc

oura

gem

ent r

egar

ding

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

an

inst

ructi

onal

stra

tegy

or p

racti

ce le

arne

d in

tr

aini

ng (s

ocia

l per

suas

ion)

.•

They

hav

e se

en o

ther

s in

thei

r bui

ldin

g im

plem

ent a

new

inst

ructi

onal

st

rate

gy o

r pra

ctice

lear

ned

in tr

aini

ng (v

icar

ious

exp

erie

nce)

.•

They

hav

e co

llect

ed in

form

al o

r for

mal

dat

a to

indi

cate

they

hav

e su

cces

sful

ly im

plem

ente

d a

new

inst

ructi

onal

stra

tegy

or p

racti

ce

lear

ned

in tr

aini

ng (m

aste

ry e

xper

ienc

e).

• Th

ey re

port

they

hav

e th

e re

sour

ces a

nd su

ppor

t nee

ded

to m

ake

a m

ajor

impa

ct o

n st

uden

t lea

rnin

g.

70%

of

teac

hers

re

port

that

w

ithin

the

last

12

mon

ths

they

hav

e m

et

5 cr

iteria

.

50%

of t

each

ers

repo

rt th

at w

ithin

the

last

12

mon

ths t

hey

have

met

5 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 5

0%

of te

ache

rs re

port

th

at w

ithin

the

last

12

mon

ths t

hey

have

met

5 c

riter

ia.

2

Dist

rict/

Build

ing

lead

ers

prov

ide

oppo

rtun

ities

fo

r tea

cher

col

labo

ratio

n th

at e

ncou

rage

s the

de

velo

pmen

t of s

ocia

l ne

twor

ks fo

cuse

d on

im

prov

ing

inst

ructi

onal

pr

actic

e.

85%

of t

each

ers r

epor

t hav

ing

met

4 c

riter

ia.

• Th

ey p

artic

ipat

e in

con

vers

ation

s with

oth

er te

ache

rs a

bout

way

s to

impr

ove

inst

ructi

on 3

or m

ore

times

per

wee

k.•

Thei

r col

labo

rativ

e co

nver

satio

ns w

ith o

ther

teac

hers

are

hel

pful

for

impr

ovin

g in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ce.

• Th

ey a

re p

art o

f for

mal

and

info

rmal

col

labo

rativ

e so

cial

net

wor

ks.

• Th

ey e

xper

ienc

e sh

ared

lead

ersh

ip w

ithin

team

s.

70%

of t

each

-er

s rep

ort

havi

ng m

et 4

cr

iteria

.

50%

of t

each

ers

repo

rt h

avin

g m

et 4

cr

iteria

.

Few

er th

an 5

0%

of te

ache

rs re

port

ha

ving

met

4 c

ri-te

ria.

p. 6

1Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9


3

Dist

rict/

Build

ing

lead

ers

desig

n sc

hool

stru

ctur

es,

prom

ote

prof

essio

nal

deve

lopm

ent,

and

allo

t tim

e in

way

s tha

t sup

port

th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

teac

her l

eade

rshi

p.

85%

of t

each

ers p

artic

ipat

e in

scho

ol le

ader

ship

opp

ortu

nitie

s th

roug

h

• w

ork

focu

sed

on sc

hool

and

/or d

istric

t im

prov

emen

t,•

prof

essio

nal d

evel

opm

ent p

rovi

ded

by th

emse

lves

and

/or c

olle

ague

s,•

wor

k fo

cuse

d on

stre

ngth

enin

g sc

hool

and

/or d

istric

t cur

ricul

um,

• op

port

uniti

es to

par

ticip

ate

in p

rofe

ssio

nal o

rgan

izatio

ns, a

nd

• w

ork

focu

sed

on fa

mily

/com

mun

ity p

artn

ersh

ips.

70%

of

teac

hers

pa

rtici

pate

in

scho

ol

lead

ersh

ip

oppo

rtun

ities

th

roug

h 5

crite

ria.

50%

of t

each

ers

parti

cipa

te in

scho

ol

lead

ersh

ip o

ppor

tuni

-tie

s thr

ough

5 c

riter

ia.

Few

er th

an 5

0% o

f te

ache

rs p

artic

-ip

ate

in sc

hool

le

ader

ship

opp

or-

tuni

ties t

hrou

gh

5 cr

iteria

.

4

Dist

rict/

Build

ing

lead

ers

esta

blish

a c

limat

e th

at

valu

es te

ache

r voi

ce in

de

cisi

on m

akin

g

Rega

rdin

g m

ajor

dec

ision

s in

thei

r sch

ool,

85%

of t

each

ers r

epor

t th

e fo

llow

ing

5 cr

iteria

occ

ur

• th

e de

cisio

n-m

akin

g pr

oces

s is t

rans

pare

nt,

• th

e de

cisio

n-m

akin

g pr

oces

s inc

lude

s opp

ortu

nitie

s for

teac

hers

to

shar

e th

eir i

deas

and

exp

ertis

e,•

they

bel

ieve

they

had

an

influ

entia

l voi

ce in

dec

ision

s,•

they

trus

t tho

se in

the

deci

sion-

mak

ing

role

, and

• a

colla

bora

tive

prob

lem

-sol

ving

app

roac

h is

used

to g

ener

ate

idea

s/so

lutio

ns.

Rega

rdin

g m

ajor

de

cisio

ns

in th

eir

scho

ol, 7

0%

of te

ache

rs

repo

rt th

e 5

crite

ria.

Rega

rdin

g m

ajor

dec

i-sio

ns in

thei

r sch

ool,

50%

of t

each

ers

repo

rt th

e 5

crite

ria.

Rega

rdin

g m

ajor

de

cisio

ns in

thei

r sc

hool

, few

er th

an

50%

of t

each

ers r

e-po

rt th

e 5

crite

ria.

5

Dist

rict/

Build

ing

lead

ers

desig

n in

tenti

onal

su

ppor

ts th

at p

rom

ote

colla

bora

tive

teac

her

inqu

iry.

85%

of t

each

ers p

artic

ipat

e in

col

labo

rativ

e in

quiry

that

incl

udes

th

e fo

llow

ing

6 cr

iteria

.

• ha

s a fo

rmal

stru

ctur

e (m

eetin

g tim

es, t

eam

s, a

nd p

roce

ss a

re d

efine

d),

• bu

ilds c

onse

nsus

aro

und

com

pelli

ng p

robl

ems o

f ins

truc

tion,

• in

volv

es c

olla

bora

tive

colle

ction

and

ana

lysis

of d

ata

rele

vant

to th

e id

entifi

ed p

robl

em o

f ins

truc

tion,

•

resu

lts in

col

lecti

ve c

omm

itmen

t to

a pl

an to

add

ress

stud

ent n

eeds

,•

resu

lts in

eva

luati

on o

f the

pla

n an

d fu

rthe

r adj

ustm

ents

, and

•

impr

oves

teac

hers

’ und

erst

andi

ng a

nd te

achi

ng p

racti

ces.

70%

of t

each

-er

s par

ticip

ate

in c

olla

bora

-tiv

e in

quiry

th

at in

clud

es

the

6 cr

iteria

.

50%

of t

each

ers

parti

cipa

te in

col

lab-

orati

ve in

quiry

that

in

clud

es th

e 6

crite

ria.

Few

er th

an 5

0% o

f te

ache

rs p

artic

i-pa

te in

col

labo

ra-

tive

inqu

iry th

at

incl

udes

the

6 cr

iteria

.

Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Beco

min

g an

Inst

ructi

onal

Lea

der i

n Yo

ur B

uild

ing

Prac

tice

Profi

le

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

yet

to

pro

ficie

ncy.

Coa

chin

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

and

co

achi

ng a

re c

ritica

l.)

1

A co

llabo

rativ

e cu

lture

and

clim

ate

is vi

sible

thro

ugh

the

stud

ents

, tea

cher

s,

and

adm

inist

rato

rs.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

pr

ovid

es a

supp

ortiv

e en

viro

nmen

t tha

t inc

lude

s al

l 5 o

f the

Pro

ficie

nt

crite

ria, p

lus m

eets

3/4

of

the

follo

win

g:•

Disc

over

ing

and

deve

lopi

ng c

apac

ity in

st

aff.

• Cr

eatin

g a

new

par

adig

m/

visio

n fo

r sch

ool c

ultu

re.

• Pr

omoti

ng in

clus

ion

for a

ll.•

Mod

elin

g an

atti

tude

of

serv

ing.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

pro

vide

s a

supp

ortiv

e en

viro

nmen

t tha

t mee

ts

4/5

of th

e fo

llow

ing

crite

ria:

• Sa

fe e

nviro

nmen

t for

all

as

evid

ence

d by

feel

ings

of t

rust

, re

spec

t, an

d co

mm

unic

ation

.•

Teac

hers

hel

p ea

ch o

ther

, in

clud

ing

on-g

oing

trai

ning

.•

Teac

hers

supp

ort a

ll st

uden

ts in

ev

ery

clas

sroo

m.

• Th

e sc

hool

is c

ultu

rally

resp

onsiv

e in

a w

ay th

at is

mul

tidim

ensio

nal,

empo

wer

ing,

and

tran

sfor

mati

ve.

• A

high

qua

lity

build

ing

lead

ersh

ip

team

is e

stab

lishe

d an

d ev

iden

ced

thou

gh m

embe

r rol

es, t

eam

fu

nctio

n an

d no

rms,

and

reco

rds

of m

eetin

gs.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

pro

vide

s a

supp

ortiv

e en

viro

nmen

t tha

t m

eets

3/5

Pro

ficie

nt c

riter

ia.

The

scho

ol le

ader

ship

has

a

scho

ol e

nviro

nmen

t with

fe

wer

than

3/5

Pro

ficie

nt

crite

ria a

re m

et.

2

Lead

ersh

ip su

ppor

ts

and

ensu

res t

each

ing

and

lear

ning

pr

actic

es e

ngag

e al

l stu

dent

s in

mea

ning

ful l

earn

ing.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent

evid

ence

-bas

ed e

ffecti

ve

met

hods

that

mee

t 4/4

cr

iteria

:•

Are

not c

onte

nt re

late

d.•

Are

tied

to te

ache

r st

anda

rds.

•

Are

impl

emen

ted

with

fid

elity

.•

Info

rm d

ecisi

ons o

f pr

ogre

ss th

roug

h re

gula

rly

sche

dule

d fo

rmati

ve

asse

ssm

ents

sele

cted

by

appr

opria

te te

ams.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent e

vide

nce-

base

d eff

ectiv

e m

etho

ds th

at m

eet

4/4

crite

ria:

• Ar

e no

t con

tent

rela

ted.

• Ar

e tie

d to

teac

her s

tand

ards

. •

Are

impl

emen

ted

with

fide

lity.

• In

form

dec

ision

s of p

rogr

ess

thro

ugh

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds

sele

cted

by

the

inst

ruct

or.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent e

vide

nce-

base

d eff

ectiv

e m

etho

ds th

at

mee

t 3/3

of t

he fo

llow

ing

crite

ria:

• Ar

e no

t con

tent

rela

ted.

• Ar

e im

plem

ente

d w

ith fi

delit

y.•

Info

rm d

ecisi

ons o

f pro

gres

s th

roug

h as

sess

men

t met

hods

se

lect

ed b

y th

e in

stru

ctor

.

Sele

ct a

nd im

plem

ent

evid

ence

-bas

ed e

ffecti

ve

met

hods

that

mee

t 3/3

of

the

follo

win

g cr

iteria

:•

May

or m

ay n

ot b

e co

nten

t rel

ated

. •

Are

impl

emen

ted

with

fid

elity

.•

Info

rm d

ecisi

ons o

f pr

ogre

ss th

roug

h as

sess

men

t met

hods

se

lect

ed b

y th

e in

stru

ctor

.


p. 6

3Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

3

Lead

ers d

evel

op

teac

her c

apac

ity to

us

e fo

rmati

ve a

s-se

ssm

ent t

hrou

gh

supp

ortiv

e da

ta

clim

ates

faci

litati

ng

the

use

of fo

rmati

ve

data

.

Lead

ers w

ork

with

teac

her

team

s to

sele

ct a

nd/o

r cr

eate

rese

arch

-bas

ed

form

ative

ass

essm

ent

met

hods

that

incl

ude

4/4

crite

ria:

• Cl

early

defi

ned

outc

omes

.•

A pr

oble

m-s

olvi

ng m

odel

.•

Stru

ctur

ed a

sses

smen

t cr

iteria

.•

Sele

cted

and

con

stru

cted

re

spon

ses

Lead

ers w

ork

with

teac

hers

on

rese

arch

-bas

ed fo

rmati

ve

asse

ssm

ent m

etho

ds th

at in

clud

e 3/

4 cr

iteria

.

Lead

ers d

esig

nate

sele

ct te

ache

rs to

de

velo

p re

sear

ch-b

ased

form

ative

as

sess

men

t met

hods

that

incl

ude

2/4

crite

ria.

Lead

ers h

ave

little

un-

ders

tand

ing

and

know

ledg

e of

form

ative

ass

essm

ent

met

hods

that

incl

ude

few

er

than

2/4

crit

eria

.

4

Lead

ers i

nitia

te

evid

ence

-bas

ed

deci

sions

and

pr

oces

ses t

hat f

ocus

on

out

com

es.

Lead

ersh

ip te

ams e

stab

lish

syst

ems t

o su

ppor

t fre

quen

t an

d re

gula

rly sc

hedu

led

team

-bas

ed d

ecisi

on-m

akin

g th

at m

eet 2

/2 c

riter

ia:

• Ar

e lin

ked

to m

ultip

le

leve

ls of

dat

a.

• Es

tabl

ish 2

or m

ore

prio

rities

for t

he sc

hool

ye

ar (s

uch

as k

now

ledg

e,

eval

-uati

on, ti

me,

re-

sour

ces)

.

Lead

ers e

stab

lish

syst

ems t

o su

ppor

t re

gula

r tea

m-b

ased

dec

ision

-mak

ing

that

mee

t 2/2

crit

eria

:•

Are

linke

d to

mul

tiple

leve

ls of

da

ta.

• Es

tabl

ish 2

or m

ore

prio

rities

fo

r the

scho

ol y

ear (

such

as

know

ledg

e, ti

me,

eva

luati

on a

nd

reso

urce

s).

Lead

ers o

vers

ee sy

stem

s of

deci

sion-

mak

ing

that

: •

Are

linke

d to

1 o

r mor

e le

vels

of d

ata.

• Es

tabl

ish 1

or m

ore

prio

rities

fo

r the

scho

ol y

ear (

such

as

know

ledg

e, ti

me,

eva

luati

on,

and

reso

urce

s).

Ther

e is

no sy

stem

in p

lace

fo

r tea

m-b

ased

dec

ision

-m

akin

g.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

: Dis

tric

t-Lev

el

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

-in

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

an

d co

achi

ng a

re

criti

cal.)

1Di

stric

t lea

ders

m

aint

ain

a co

l-la

bora

tive

cultu

re

and

clim

ate

at

the

dist

rict-l

evel

an

d w

ith b

uild

ing

lead

ers.

Dist

rict L

eade

rshi

p Te

am (D

LT)

and

dist

rict c

onta

cts a

ddre

ss a

ll cr

iteria

indi

cate

d as

pro

ficie

nt.

Parti

cipa

tion

of D

LT in

mon

thly

m

eetin

gs is

con

siste

nt.

The

mee

tings

are

wel

l-doc

umen

ted

exam

ples

of p

rofic

ient

im

plem

enta

tion.

Com

mun

icati

on p

roto

cols

are

cons

isten

tly fo

llow

ed a

nd sh

ared

di

stric

t wid

e.

As n

ew D

LT m

embe

rs a

re

brou

ght o

n bo

ard,

they

rece

ive

prof

essio

nal d

evel

opm

ent a

bout

di

stric

t-lev

el im

plem

enta

tion

and

dist

rict-l

evel

role

s.

•Di

stric

t-lev

el c

onta

ct p

erso

n is

iden

tified

and

act

s as t

he

prim

ary

cont

act f

or re

cipr

ocal

com

mun

icati

on w

ith th

e Co

achi

ng S

uppo

rt Te

am (C

ST) f

acili

tato

r. •

DLT

is in

pla

ce, c

ompr

ised

of m

embe

rs w

ith e

xper

tise

in

the

follo

win

g ar

eas:

Inst

ructi

on, c

urric

ulum

, ass

essm

ent,

tech

nolo

gy, s

peci

al e

duca

tion,

pre

-K, e

lem

enta

ry, m

iddl

e,

and

high

scho

ol.

•DL

T m

eets

mon

thly

to c

olla

bora

te a

nd sh

ape

parti

cipa

tion.

•DL

T ha

s dev

elop

ed a

n on

goin

g pa

rtne

rshi

p w

ith C

ST.

•Te

chno

logy

(i.e

. virt

ual m

eetin

gs, d

ocum

ent s

harin

g) is

us

ed fo

r tim

ely

and

cons

isten

t sha

ring

of in

form

ation

and

su

ppor

t fro

m th

e CS

T.

Com

mun

icati

on p

roto

cols

resu

lt in

con

siste

nt u

nder

stan

ding

of

par

ticip

ation

in a

ll bu

ildin

gs.

•Bu

ildin

g-le

vel c

onta

cts i

denti

fied.

•A

cons

isten

t dist

rict-w

ide

plan

for c

omm

unic

ating

with

bu

ildin

g-le

vel c

onta

cts i

s est

ablis

hed.

•Bu

ildin

g-le

vel c

onta

cts u

se a

pro

toco

l to

regu

larly

di

ssem

inat

e in

form

ation

to a

ll st

aff.

DLT

colla

bora

tes w

ith b

uild

ing

lead

ers t

o de

fine

build

ing-

leve

l exp

ecta

tions

, dev

elop

acti

on p

lans

, col

lect

dat

a, a

nd

mon

itor p

rogr

ess t

owar

d im

prov

ing

inst

ructi

on le

adin

g to

st

uden

t lea

rnin

g.

•Di

stric

t-lev

el c

onta

ct

pers

on is

iden

tified

, but

co

mm

unic

ation

and

pa

rtne

rshi

p w

ith C

ST is

in

cons

isten

t.

•DL

T is

in p

lace

, but

not

al

l are

as o

f exp

ertis

e ar

e re

pres

ente

d.

•DL

T m

eets

qua

rter

ly o

r le

ss.

•U

se o

f tec

hnol

ogy

is sp

orad

ic, i

f at a

ll.

•Co

mm

unic

ation

pr

otoc

ols a

re n

ot

esta

blish

ed.

•Bu

ildin

g-le

vel c

onta

cts

are

iden

tified

for s

ome

build

ings

, but

not

all.

•In

form

ation

abo

ut

impl

emen

tatio

n is

inco

nsist

ently

shar

ed

with

bui

ldin

g-le

vel

educ

ator

s.

•Ac

tion

plan

s are

de

velo

ped,

but

ha

ve g

aps i

n ke

y co

mpo

nent

s.

•Di

stric

t-lev

el

cont

act p

erso

n is

iden

tified

, but

co

mm

unic

ation

an

d pa

rtne

rshi

p w

ith C

ST d

oes

not o

ccur

.

•DL

T is

not i

n pl

ace.

•Te

chno

logy

is

not u

sed

for s

harin

g in

form

ation

, m

eetin

g, o

r co

llabo

ratio

n.

•Bu

ildin

g-le

vel

cont

acts

are

not

id

entifi

ed.

•In

form

ation

is

not s

hare

d w

ith

build

ing-

leve

l ed

ucat

ors.

•Ac

tion

plan

s are

no

t dev

elop

ed.


p. 6

5Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

: Dis

tric

t-Lev

el

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

-in

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

an

d co

achi

ng a

re

criti

cal.)

2Di

stric

t lea

ders

de

mon

stra

te

com

mitm

ent

to sc

hool

im

prov

emen

t th

roug

h pa

rtici

patio

n in

coa

chin

g,

trai

ning

, and

da

ta-d

riven

ac

tion

to im

prov

e in

stru

ction

al

prac

tice.

An a

ction

pla

n w

ith

impl

emen

tatio

n tim

elin

e, a

ligne

d w

ith e

xisti

ng C

ompr

ehen

sive

Scho

ol Im

prov

emen

t Pla

n (C

SIP)

and

dist

rict p

rofe

ssio

nal

deve

lopm

ent p

lan,

is d

evel

oped

an

d us

ed.

Thi

s acti

on p

lan

addr

esse

s all

item

s list

ed a

s pr

ofici

ent.

Pro

gres

s on

the

actio

n pl

an is

m

onito

ring

mon

thly

by

the

DLT.

Ba

sed

on p

rogr

ess m

onito

ring,

m

odifi

catio

ns to

the

actio

n pl

an

are

colla

bora

tivel

y id

entifi

ed

by th

e DL

T an

d co

mm

unic

ated

ac

ross

the

dist

rict

An a

ction

pla

n w

ith im

plem

enta

tion

timel

ine,

alig

ned

with

ex

isting

Com

preh

ensiv

e Sc

hool

Impr

ovem

ent P

lan

(CSI

P)

and

dist

rict p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent p

lan,

is d

evel

oped

an

d us

ed.

Thi

s acti

on p

lan:

•Is

info

rmed

by

impl

emen

tatio

n an

d ou

tcom

e da

ta (e

.g.,

SAPP

, CW

IS).

•Pr

ovid

es fo

r tra

inin

g an

d co

achi

ng o

n eff

ectiv

e te

achi

ng

and

lear

ning

pra

ctice

s.

•Cr

eate

s str

uctu

res a

nd p

roce

sses

for c

olla

bora

tive

prob

lem

-sol

ving

usin

g da

ta.

•Cr

eate

s str

uctu

res a

nd p

roce

sses

for s

choo

l-bas

ed

coac

hing

.•

Inco

rpor

ates

virt

ual c

oach

ing

and

tech

nolo

gy to

enh

ance

qu

ality

and

tim

elin

ess o

f coa

chin

g.•

Incl

udes

ann

ual b

ench

mar

ks a

nd o

utco

mes

alig

ning

are

as

of fo

ci a

cros

s dist

rict p

rioriti

es.

•Bu

ilds i

n op

port

uniti

es fo

r pro

gres

s mon

itorin

g an

d re

visiti

ng a

ction

pla

n an

nual

ly.

This

plan

con

tain

s:

•Pr

ioriti

zed

goal

s.•

Annu

al m

easu

rabl

e go

als a

nd o

utco

mes

mat

ched

to d

ata

sour

ces.

•Id

entifi

ed d

ata

elem

ents

(e.g

, CW

IS, S

APP)

, whi

ch a

re

revi

ewed

at l

east

ann

ually

for d

ata-

driv

en d

iscus

sions

.

An a

ction

pla

n w

ith

impl

emen

tatio

n tim

elin

e is

deve

lope

d; h

owev

er, t

here

ar

e ga

ps in

reco

mm

ende

d ite

ms,

dat

a, a

nd re

view

pr

oces

ses a

s list

ed in

the

profi

cien

t col

umn.

Of

the

10 re

com

men

datio

ns

liste

d, a

t lea

st 6

are

ad

dres

sed

fully

.

An a

ction

pla

n do

es

not e

xist

OR

few

er

than

6 it

ems a

re

addr

esse

d fu

lly.


Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Impl

emen

tatio

n Pr

actic

e Pr

ofile

: Dis

tric

t-Lev

el

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

Exem

plar

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Profi

cien

t

Clos

e to

Pro

ficie

nt

(Ski

ll is

emer

ging

, but

not

ye

t to

profi

cien

cy. C

oach

-in

g is

reco

mm

ende

d.)

Far f

rom

Pro

ficie

nt

(Fol

low

-up

trai

ning

an

d co

achi

ng a

re

criti

cal.)

3Di

stric

t lea

ders

re

view

dist

rict-

leve

l and

bu

ildin

g-le

vel

inst

ructi

on

and

lear

ning

ou

tcom

es d

ata

and

prov

ide

supp

ort b

ased

on

data

.

A sy

stem

for s

uppo

rting

an

d m

onito

ring

fidel

ity a

nd

impl

emen

tatio

n of

pro

gres

s is

esta

blish

ed, u

sed,

and

revi

siting

an

nual

ly. T

his s

yste

m in

clud

es

a da

ta re

view

cyc

le c

onsis

ting

of

item

s list

ed a

s pro

ficie

nt.

Base

d on

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

data

revi

ew c

ycle

, dist

rict l

eade

rs

rece

ive

prof

essio

nal d

evel

opm

ent

(or r

efre

sher

pro

fess

iona

l de

velo

pmen

t) to

mai

ntai

n pr

ofici

ent i

mpl

emen

tatio

n of

the

data

ele

men

ts a

nd th

e re

view

cy

cle.

A sy

stem

for s

uppo

rting

and

mon

itorin

g fid

elity

and

im

plem

enta

tion

of p

rogr

ess i

s est

ablis

hed,

use

d, a

nd

revi

sited

ann

ually

. Th

is sy

stem

incl

udes

a d

ata

revi

ew c

ycle

w

hich

pro

mot

es th

e fo

llow

ing

actio

ns:

•De

term

ine

dist

rict-w

ide

and

build

ing-

leve

l sta

tus a

nd

need

s for

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t usin

g CW

IS, S

APP,

an

d ot

her d

ata.

•De

term

ine

focu

s are

as o

f nee

d an

d se

t ben

chm

arks

for

impr

ovem

ent.

•Pr

ovid

e fo

r tra

inin

g an

d co

achi

ng (i

nclu

ding

use

of t

he

virt

ual l

earn

ing

platf

orm

) to

addr

ess n

eeds

for i

mpr

oved

in

stru

ction

and

bui

ld o

n st

reng

ths.

•

Prov

ide

oppo

rtun

ity fo

r edu

cato

r refl

ectio

n on

the

acqu

isitio

n an

d ap

plic

ation

of n

ew in

stru

ction

al

know

ledg

e an

d sk

ills.

•M

onito

r im

plem

enta

tion

thro

ugh

obse

rvati

ons a

nd

wal

kthr

ough

s.

•Pr

ovid

e ed

ucat

ors w

ith d

escr

iptiv

e fe

edba

ck a

nd su

ppor

t fo

r im

prov

emen

t.

•Re

view

scho

ol-w

ide

data

and

iden

tify

way

s of c

ontin

uing

to

impr

ove

inst

ructi

on a

nd o

utco

mes

.•

Shar

e da

ta a

nd c

olla

bora

te w

ith b

uild

ing

lead

ers.

•

Use

dat

a at

all

leve

ls to

gui

de p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent.

The

dist

rict e

ngag

es

in a

dat

a re

view

cyc

le;

how

ever

, the

re a

re m

issin

g st

eps o

r min

imal

leve

ls of

im

plem

enta

tion.

Of t

he 9

re

com

men

ded

step

s list

ed,

at le

ast fi

ve a

re a

ddre

ssed

fu

lly.

The

dist

rict d

oes

not c

ondu

ct a

dat

a re

view

cyc

le O

R fe

wer

than

5 it

ems

are

addr

esse

d fu

lly.

4Di

stric

t le

ader

s alig

n ex

pect

ation

s and

re

quire

men

ts

acro

ss th

e di

stric

t in

orde

r to

impr

ove

effici

ency

, co

nsist

ency

, and

eff

ectiv

enes

s of

inst

ructi

on.

The

DLT

uses

an

esta

blish

ed

prot

ocol

for r

evie

w o

f all

dist

rict

wor

k, in

itiati

ves,

and

pro

gram

s to

ass

ure

curr

ent a

nd o

ngoi

ng

alig

nmen

t with

the

dist

rict C

SIP.

Th

e pr

otoc

ol c

onsis

ts o

f all

item

s in

dica

ted

as p

rofic

ient

.

Revi

ew o

f the

pro

toco

l, in

form

ed

by d

ata,

occ

urs a

t lea

st tw

ice

annu

ally.

Det

aile

d no

tes o

f the

re

view

are

take

n an

d us

ed to

in

form

mod

ifica

tions

to th

e CS

IP.

The

DLT

uses

an

esta

blish

ed a

pro

toco

l for

revi

ew o

f all

dist

rict w

ork,

initi

ative

s, a

nd p

rogr

ams t

o as

sure

cur

rent

an

d on

goin

g al

ignm

ent w

ith th

e di

stric

t CSI

P. T

he p

roto

col

cons

ists o

f: •

A sc

hedu

le o

f tak

ing

inve

ntor

y of

all

dist

rict i

nitia

tives

in a

m

anne

r tha

t ide

ntifie

s red

unda

ncie

s and

inco

nsist

enci

es.

•A

proc

ess f

or a

ssur

ing

alig

nmen

t as n

ew in

itiati

ves o

r pr

ogra

ms a

re a

dded

to d

istric

t/bu

ildin

g ex

pect

ation

s.Pe

rson

s des

igna

ted

with

resp

onsib

ility

for f

ollo

win

g th

e pr

otoc

ol a

nd c

omm

unic

ating

to d

istric

t/bu

ildin

g le

ader

s ho

w a

lignm

ent c

an/s

houl

d oc

cur.

The

DLT

has e

stab

lishe

d a

prot

ocol

add

ress

ing

all r

ecom

men

ded

item

s; h

owev

er n

ot a

ll re

com

men

datio

ns a

re

impl

emen

ted.

The

DLT

has

an e

stab

lishe

d pr

otoc

ol; b

ut it

do

es n

ot c

onta

in

all r

ecom

men

ded

item

s OR

a pr

otoc

ol

has n

ot b

een

esta

blish

ed.


p. 6

7Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

Dist

rict C

ontin

uous

Impr

ovem

ent F

ram

ewor

k (M

MD/

DCI)

Blue

prin

t, M

ay 2

019

Support: Implementation Checklist

Impl

emen

tatio

n Ch

eckl

ist:

Dist

rict-L

evel

Focu

sAc

tion

Step

s

Curr

ent S

tatu

s

(Che

ck 1

leve

l per

item

)

Plan

ned

Focu

s Are

as

(Che

ck to

iden

tify

item

s

for c

oach

ing/

supp

ort,

as n

eede

d, in

eac

h

year

)In

plac

eIn

pro

gres

s

Not

begu

nYe

ar 1

Year

2Ye

ar 3

Mid

stag

e

Early

stag

eEs

senti

al F

uncti

on: D

istr

ict l

eade

rs m

aint

ain

a co

llabo

rativ

e cu

lture

and

clim

ate

at th

e di

stric

t-lev

el a

nd w

ith b

uild

ing

lead

ers.

Lead

ersh

ip

1Fo

rm d

istric

t lea

ders

hip

team

(DLT

).

(see

Blu

eprin

t for

reco

mm

ende

d co

mpo

sition

)2

Desig

nate

dist

rict-l

evel

con

tact

per

son.

3De

signa

te b

uild

ing-

leve

l con

tact

per

son

(for e

ach

build

ing

in d

istric

t) w

ho w

ill

diss

emin

ate

info

rmati

on to

facu

lty a

nd st

aff in

the

build

ing.

Com

mun

icati

on1

Deve

lop

prot

ocol

for m

aint

aini

ng o

ngoi

ng c

omm

unic

ation

with

Coa

chin

g

Supp

ort T

eam

Fac

ilita

tor a

nd C

ST m

embe

rs, p

rioriti

zing

the

use

of v

irtua

l

tech

nolo

gy to

incr

ease

com

mun

icati

on.

2De

velo

p a

dist

rict-w

ide

plan

for c

onsis

tent

and

tim

ely

shar

ing

of in

form

ation

with

bui

ldin

g le

ader

s.

p. 6

9Di

stric

t Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t Fra

mew

ork

(MM

D/DC

I) Bl

uepr

int,

May

201

9

Support: Implementation Checklist

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

: Dis

tric

t lea

ders

dem

onst

rate

com

mitm

ent t

o sc

hool

impr

ovem

ent t

hrou

gh p

artic

ipati

on in

coa

chin

g, tr

aini

ng, a

nd d

ata-

driv

en a

ction

to im

prov

e in

stru

ction

al p

racti

ce.

Com

mitm

ent

1

DLT

iden

tify

a pr

oces

s for

mon

itorin

g pr

ogre

ss o

f the

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

ogre

ss,

incl

udin

g an

nual

goa

ls an

d ou

tcom

es, a

s wel

l as e

xpec

tatio

ns fo

r edu

cato

r

parti

cipa

tion

in th

e vi

rtua

l lea

rnin

g pl

atfor

m in

eac

h of

the

prac

tice

area

s.

2Ad

min

ister

Sel

f-Ass

essm

ent P

racti

ce P

rofil

e at

leas

t tw

ice

each

yea

r for

prac

tices

alig

ning

to P

D pl

an.

3Ad

min

ister

impl

emen

tatio

n su

rvey

(e.g

. Col

labo

rativ

e W

ork

Impl

emen

tatio

n

Surv

ey) a

t lea

st a

nnua

lly.

4U

se te

chno

logy

to in

crea

se th

e qu

ality

and

tim

elin

ess o

f coa

chin

g fo

r im

prov

ed

inst

ructi

on.

5Pa

rtici

pate

in re

gion

al, c

adre

, and

stat

e ev

ents

to g

athe

r ins

ight

s and

wisd

om

from

oth

er d

istric

ts.

Esse

ntial

Fun

ction

: Dis

tric

t lea

ders

revi

ew d

istr

ict-l

evel

and

bui

ldin

g-le

vel i

nstr

uctio

n an

d le

arni

ng o

utco

mes

dat

a an

d pr

ovid

e su

ppor

t bas

ed o

n da

ta

Perf

orm

ance

/

Out

com

es

1Su

ppor

t the

use

of d

ata

(e.g

. SAP

P, C

WIS

) to

info

rm p

rofe

ssio

nal d

evel

opm

ent

and

build

ing-

leve

l sup

port

.

2

Deve

lop

and

impl

emen

t pro

toco

l for

con

ducti

ng w

alk-

thro

ughs

, obs

ervi

ng

impl

emen

tatio

n, a

nd m

onito

ring

fidel

ty a

nd p

rogr

ess t

owar

d fu

ll

impl

emen

tatio

n of

iden

tified

pra

ctice

s acr

oss t

he d

istric

t.

3An

nual

ly, su

mm

arize

dist

rict-w

ide

fidel

ity a

nd p

rogr

ess t

owar

d fu

ll

impl

emen

tatio

n of

iden

tified

pra

ctice

s.

4Es

tabl

ish d

istric

t- an

d bu

ildin

g-le

vel g

oal(s

) and

ben

chm

ark(

s) p

erfo

rman

ce

leve

ls on

the

SAPP

and

CW

IS.

5Re

visit

and

revi

se P

D pl

ans b

ased

on

data

.Es

senti

al F

uncti

on: D

istr

ict l

eade

rs a

lign

expe

ctati

ons a

nd re

quire

men

ts a

cros

s the

dis

tric

t in

orde

r to

impr

ove

effici

ency

, con

sist

ency

, and

effe

ctive

ness

of

inst

ructi

on.

Alig

nmen

t1

Deve

lop

timel

ines

and

exp

ecta

tions

alig

ning

impl

emen

tatio

n go

als a

nd o

ther

dist

rict i

nitia

tives

.

2Al

ign

impl

emen

tatio

n go

als w

ith C

SIP:

Com

preh

ensiv

e Sc

hool

Impr

ovem

ent

Plan

.


APPENDIX

Support: Appendix


Glossary of Terms

Act: The final phase of the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle in which data is used to determine revisions to the implementation processes and/or to the practice being implemented is act.

Action Plan: A plan created to organize a district and/or school improvement process is an action plan. The plan should include details of scope, sequence, timeline, and designated responsibility. Progress toward accomplishing action plan items should be reviewed and revised on an ongoing basis.

Adoption: The first stage of implementation, which includes taking inventory, looking at the reality, setting priorities, and master planning is adoption.

Alignment: Being purposeful about developing and implementing a process of examining commonalities and efficiencies across educational components (e.g., initiatives, assessment, and curriculum) is alignment.

Artifacts: Various types of documents, records, notes, and data used when evaluating effectiveness or documenting evidence of implementation are artifacts.

Assessment and Reflection: A key professional learning module component that provides learners with opportunities to reflect on their learning and potential implementation challenges is the stage of assessment and reflection.

Assessment Capable Learners: Referred to in Dr. Hattie’s (2008) research as “student self-report grades,” assessment capable learners are students who know the learning target, can describe their level of learning in relation to the learning target, and describe their next steps.

Blueprint: A blueprint is a detailed plan of action. The MMD/DCI Blueprint describes an approach and processes for implementing effective educational practices in Missouri districts and schools.

Cadre: A cadre is a small group of people specially trained for a particular purpose or profession. In the context of MMD/DCI, small groups of participating districts are trained and coached by their coaching support team to increase district capacity across each of the districts in the cadre.

Cause Data: Data measuring variables within the system or implementation process that may affect the desired outcome (e.g., implementation fidelity, type of professional development, or analysis of competing initiatives) is referred to as cause data.

Coaching Support Teams (CST): In the context of MMD/DCI, a CST is a team comprised of professionals who hold identified expertise in leadership and school structure, academic, social/behavioral, special education, data, technology, assessment, accountability, and systems change. CSTs work closely with district leadership teams to support and increase district capacity in implementation and sustainability of evidence-based educational practices.

Coaching: Coaching is an aspect of professional development focused on improving practice in the applied context. Coaching is a learning relationship in which guided reflection, modeling, guided practice, and learning strategies for improvement occur.

Support: Appendix


Collaborative Teams: As a foundational piece of the framework, collaborative teams (a) maintain structures/processes for efficient collaboration and (b) intentionally review data, analyze, and discuss the impact of educational practices on student learning.

Common Formative Assessment: As a foundational piece of the framework, common formative assessment is systematic and cyclical process designed to provide timely teacher/student feedback on curricula and student learning to improve both instructional practices and academic achievement.

Competency Drivers: Competencies of key personnel who have direct and supportive roles are essential for effective implementation. The competency drivers include selection, training, coaching, and fidelity/performance assessment.

Data-Based Decision Making: As a team process, data-based decision making occurs when teams (a) disaggregate data, (b) analyze student performance, (c) set incremental student learning goals, (d) discuss the relationship between instruction and student learning, and (e) identify effective key teaching and learning practices to implement.

District Leadership Team: A district leadership team is comprised of district-level administrators, districtwide coaches, curriculum and assessment leaders, professional development coordinators, and other instruction and administrative leaders.

Do: The second phase of the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, when implementation begins.

Effect Data: The measurement of the desired outcome (e.g., student learning or behavior) is referred to as effect data in the data-based decision making cycle.

Effect Size: Quantifying the difference between two groups or the same group over time, on a common scale is effect size.

Effective Teaching and Learning Practices: Within the MMD framework, selected teaching and learning practices, demonstrated through research, result in improved student learning. In order to maximize outcomes, the practices should be implemented with fidelity across content areas.

Essential Functions: Sometimes called core components, active ingredients, or practice elements, essential functions when used in a practice-profile format, provide a clear description of the features that must be present to say that an innovation is being used to achieve outcomes. Essential functions guide practitioner decisions and ensure consistency, integrity, and sustainable effort across practitioners.

Essential Questions: Essential questions are a component of a learning module. These questions provoke deep thought, lively discussion, sustained inquiry, and additional questions leading to new and/or deep insights.

Facilitative Administration: As one of four organization drivers, educational leadership provide facilitative administration when they collaborate with their teams to identify and address challenges, form clear communication protocols and feedback loops, develop and adjust policies and procedures, and reduce system barriers to implementing the program as intended.

Support: Appendix


Feedback: Feedback is defined as information provided by an agent (e.g. teacher, peer, book, parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding.

Fidelity/Performance Assessment: As one of four competency drivers, fidelity and performance assessment is a process or tool used to determine the extent to which a program is implemented as intended and achieving intended student achievement outcomes.

Fidelity: Fidelity is the degree to which a program as implemented corresponds with the program as described.

Foundations: The framework references three educational practices as foundations to the framework: collaborative teams, data-based decision making, and common formative assessment.

Full Implementation: The fourth stage of implementation involves taking implementation to scale. At a district-level, full implementation occurs when all school buildings in the district are implementing the MMD/DCI framework.

Implementation Drivers: Implementation drivers are based on the commonalities among successfully implemented practices and programs found in the literature and derived from current best practices.

Implementation Science: Implementation science is the study of factors that influence the full and effective use of innovations in practice.

Implementation Stages: The implementation process has six developmental stages: adoption, program installation, initial implementation, full operation, innovation, and sustainability.

Implementation Survey: Participating districts will use the Collaborative Work Implementation Survey, a 24-item instrument designed using a five-point Likert scale intended to measure the degree of implementation of desired processes and practices within Missouri school buildings active in the Collaborative Work. The five domains are effective teaching and learning practices, common formative assessments, data-based decision making, leadership, and professional development.

Implementation Team: Implementation teams actively support implementation of a new program or innovation and provide an internal support structure to move selected programs and innovations through the stages of implementation.

Implementation: Implementation is putting into place a specified set of activities, protocols, and structures designed to address a gap or area of need.

Initial Implementation: During initial implementation, teams begin putting the practice into place and monitoring early steps.

Innovation: Innovation is the fifth stage of implementation, when the model has been fully implemented and sufficient data has been gathered. Once data is analyzed and interpreted, innovative modifications, additions and subtractions are made to the model.

Support: Appendix


Instructional Leader: Instructional leaders have a student focus and are concerned with the teachers’ and school’s impact on student learning and instructional issues. Instructional leaders conduct classroom observations, ensure professional development enhances student learning, communicate high academic standards, and ensure all school environments are conducive to learning.

Leadership: As one of four organization drivers, effective educational leaders know how to build and strengthen a network of organizational support that includes (a) the professional capacity of teachers and staff, (b) the professional community in which they learn and work, (c) family and community engagement, and (d) effective management and operations of the school/district.

Learning Intentions: Learning intentions, are also known as learning objectives, clearly describe what students should know, understand, and do.

Look-Fors: Look-fors are indicators in student work that demonstrate changes in proficiency.

Metacognition: Metacognition occurs when a student is conscious of his/her thinking and level of cognition while in the process of learning.

Missouri Model Districts (MMD)/District Continuous Improvement (DCI): District Continuous Improvement is informed by the prior two years of implementation of Missouri Model Districts in two cohorts. Using a district-level approach, the goal of District Continuous Improvement is to implement an integrated framework of effective academic and behavioral practices designed for achieving exceptional student outcomes. The framework and available implementation supports are outlined in this Blueprint.

Opening and Introductions: Opening and introductions are a key learning package component in which educator-learners receive an overview of the day, including learner objectives outcomes, and essential questions.

Organization Drivers: Organization drivers represent the group of factors that form the supports and structures essential for (a) keeping implementation processes on track, (b) evaluating drift in implementation through data, and (c) determining adjustments to implementation as needed. The organization drivers are data-support data systems, facilitative administration, systems interventions, and leadership.

PDSA Cycle: The PDSA cycle is a four-phase, data-driven cycle for designing and monitoring specific elements of implementation. The phases are Plan, Do, Study, Act.

Plan: In the first phase of the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, teams use a data-informed process for identifying barriers or challenges and specifying the components and method for implementation.

Practice Profile: A practice profile is a framework developed by the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) as a way of outlining criteria using a rubric structure with clearly defined practice-level characteristics.

Support: Appendix


Preparation: Preparation is a key learning module component that provides opportunities for learners to engage in content prior to the formal training.

Professional Learning Module: A professional learning module is a focused approach to professional development content that (a) addresses adult learning principles and (b) upholds specific characteristics of high quality professional development and (c) focuses on implementation at the classroom level.

Program Installation: Program installation is the second stage of implementation, wherein an environment supportive of implementation is established at the district and school building levels.

Protocols: Protocols within collaborative teams consist of agreed upon guidelines/norms for conversation and a structure that permits focused conversations to occur. Protocols are used to look at student and adult work, give feedback, solve problems or dilemmas, observe classrooms or peers, advance problem-solve on a specific issue, and structure a discussion around a text.

Regional Professional Development Center (RPDC): The nine Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDCs) continue to be a resource for addressing training needs.

Results Indicators: Results indicators facilitate the planning for, sustaining, or revising of strategies/practices, and also allow teachers to monitor progress of implementation and effectiveness of these strategies/practices.

Rubric: A rubric is a criterion-based tool used to communicate expectations of proficiency and to assess a student’s demonstrated level of performance, understanding, or knowledge around the defined criteria.

Scaling-Up: Scaling-up is the process of reaching larger numbers of students or education settings.

School Building Leadership Team: A school building leadership team is comprised of building-level administrators, teacher-leaders, instructional coaches, and other persons integral to the overall building-level system. This team supports building level-implementation and structures for moving through the implementation stages and assuring the implementation drivers are addressed.

School-Based Implementation Coaching: School based implementation coaching occurs when peer-to- peer coaching, focused on educational practices, is systematically used to support ongoing implementation and problem-solve implementation challenges.

Self-Assessment Practice Profile: The self-assessment practice profile is an online tool for team-based analysis of Practice Profiles (http://sapp.missouripd.org/instructions). Through this tool, individual educators as well as teams of educators complete a questionnaire aligned to items on practice profiles. Once complete, Administrators create reports to view implementation of practices across a team, grade level, or other administrator- determined group of educators.

Study: As the third phase in the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, teams use assessment and tracking measures identified during the planning phase to study the effects of implementation.

Success Criteria: Success criteria describes student outcomes and expectations.

Support: Appendix


Sustainability: The final stage of implementation is sustainability. The ultimate goal is a sustainable model of services and supports that provides a valid, reliable, and evidence-based approach to responding to the educational needs of all students by developing the capacity to maintain lessons learned from MMD.

Systems Interventions: As one of four organization drivers, systems interventions are the ways of aligning resources, expectations, and system supports to support implementation.

Topic in Action: Topic in action is a key learning module component where learners explore ways to incorporate new knowledge and skills into their teaching.

Topic in Practice: Topic in practice is a key learning module component that provides opportunities for learners to discuss what application in the classroom looks like.

Training: As a component of professional development, training provides for the introduction of new practices, exploration of applications in real world settings, and experimentation with application scenarios under the guidance of an expert.

Unpacking the Topic: Unpacking the topic is a key learning module component that explores core components and implementation steps.

Visible Learning: Coined by John Hattie, visible learning is an enhanced role for teachers as they become evaluators of their own teaching. Visible refers to making student learning visible to teachers, ensuring attributes that make a “visible” difference to student learning. Learning refers to how we go about knowing and understanding then doing something about student “learning.”

Support: Appendix


Resources for Further LearningAssessment Capable LearnersArter, J., & McTighe, J. (2000). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Corwin Press. Chappuis, J. (2009). Seven strategies of assessment for learning. Allyn & Bacon.

McMillan, J. H., & Hearn, J. (2008). Student self-assessment: The key to stronger student motivation and higher achievement. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40-49.

Mueller, J. (2016). Authentic assessment toolbox: What is a portfolio? Retrieved from http://jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/portfolios.htm.

School-Based Implementation Coaching Aguilar, E. (2013). The art of coaching: Effective strategies for school transformation. John Wiley & Sons.

Aguilar, E. (2016). The art of coaching teams: Building resilient communities that transform schools. John Wiley & Sons.

Blase, Karen, D. Fixsen, Melissa Van Dyke, and Michelle Duda. (2009). Implementation drivers: Best practices for coaching. Chapel Hill, NC: National Implementation Research Network.

Gilbert, L. (2005). What Helps Beginning Teachers? Educational Leadership, 62(8), 36-39.

Hattie, J., & Yates, G. C. (2013). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. Routledge.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 4-10.

National Implementation Research Network. (2017). Active Implementation Hub: Coaching Module. Retrieved from: http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/module-2/coaching

Roth, J., & Broad, E. (2008). The speed of trust: The one thing that changes everything. People & Strategy, 31(1), 57-58.

Russo, A. (2004). School-based coaching. Harvard Education Letter, 20(4), 1-4.

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Crown Pub.

Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 10-16.

Common Formative AssessmentAinsworth, L. & Viegut, D. (2006). Common formative assessment: How to connect standards-based instruction and assessment. (pp. 23, 56, 57). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Chappuis, J. (2009). Seven strategies of assessment for learning. Allyn & Bacon.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Karhanek, G. (2010). Raising the bar and closing the gap: Whatever it takes. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Support: Appendix


Data-Based Decision MakingBrookhart, S. M. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Harn, B., Parisi, D., & Stoolmiller, M., (2013). Balancing fidelity with flexibility and fit: What do we really know about fidelity of implementation in schools? Exceptional Children, 79(2), 181-193.

Institute of Education Sciences (2009). Using student data to support instructional decision making. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide.aspx?sid=12.

FeedbackBrookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. ASCD.

Wiggins, G. (2016). Seven keys to effective feedback. On Formative Assessment: Readings from Educational Leadership (EL Essentials), 24.

William, D. (2016). The secret of effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 73(7), 10-15.

LeadershipBrinson, D., & Steiner, L. (2007). Building collective efficacy: How leaders inspire teachers to achieve. Issue Brief. Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement.

Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Muth, R. (2004). Leadership mentoring in clinical practice: Role socialization, professional development, and capacity building. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 468-494.

Donohoo, J. (2016). Collective Efficacy: How Educators’ Beliefs Impact Student Learning. Corwin Press.

Fullan, M. (2011). The six secrets of change: What the best leaders do to help their organizations survive and thrive. John Wiley & Sons.

Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507.

Hattie, J. (2015). High-Impact Leadership. Educational Leadership, 72(5), 36-40.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2008). Linking leadership to student learning: The contributions of leader efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 455-457.

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results. ASCD.

Telfer, D.M. (2011). Moving your numbers: Five districts share how they used assessment and

Support: Appendix


accountability to increase performance for students with disabilities as part of districtwide improvement. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/MovingYourNumbers.pdf.

Tschannen-Moran, M. (2014). Trust matters: Leadership for successful schools. John Wiley & Sons.

Wlodkowski, R. J. (2011). Enhancing adult motivation to learn: A comprehensive guide for teaching all adults. John Wiley & Sons.

MetacognitionCosta, A. L. (2008). The thought-filled curriculum. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 20.

Nokes, J. D., & Dole, J. A. (2004). Helping adolescent readers through explicit strategy instruction. Adolescent Literacy Research and Practice, 162-182.

Stoll, L., Fink, D., & Earl, L. M. (2003). It’s about learning (and it’s about time). Psychology Press.

Implementation ScienceNational Implementation Research Network. (2017). Active Implementation Hub Modules: http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/

Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Naoom, S. F., Van Dyke, M., & Wallace, F. (2009). Implementation: The missing link between research and practice. NIRN Implementation Brief, 1.

Support: Appendix


References1. Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

2. Telfer, D. M. (2011). Moving your numbers: Five districts share how they used assessment and accountability to increase performance for students with disabilities as part of districtwide improvement.

3. Chappuis, J., Chappuis, S., and Stiggins, R. (2009). Formative assessment and assessment for learning. In Pinkus, L. M. (2009). Meaningful Measurement: The Role of Assessments in Improving High School Education in the Twenty-First Century. Alliance for Excellent Education.

4. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.

5. Hattie, J. (December 2017). Hattie ranking: 252 influences and effect sizes related to student achievement. Retrieved from https://Visible-Learning.org

6. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

7. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906.

8. Costa, A. L. (2008). The thought-filled curriculum. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 20.

9. Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018). The effect of teacher coaching. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588.

10. Gottfredson, C., & Mosher, B. (2012). Are you meeting all five moments of learning need? Learning Solutions Magazine. Retrieved from: https://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/949/

11. National Implementation Research Network. (2017). NIRN. Retrieved from http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/.

12. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., & Friedman, R. M. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).

13. Blase, K., & Fixsen, D. (2013). Practice policy feedback cycle. National Implementation Research Network. Retrieved from http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/module-5/topic-3-practice-policy-feedback-loops.

14. National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Support. (2017). Technical guide for alignment of initiatives, programs, practices in school districts. Eugene, OR. Retrieved from: www.pbis.org.

15. Metz, A. (2016). Practice Profiles: A Process for Capturing Evidence and Operationalizing Innovations. Chapel Hill, NC: National Implementation Research Network, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Support: Appendix


16. Asayesh, G. (1993). Staff Development for Improving Student Outcomes. Journal of Staff Development, 14(3), 24-27.

17. Boudah, D. J., Blair, E., & Mitchell, V. J. (2003). Implementing and Sustaining Strategies Instruction: Authentic and Effective Professional Development or “Business as Usual?” Exceptionality, 11(1), 3-23.

18. Trivette, C. M., Dunst, C. J., Hamby, D. W., & O’Herin, C. E. (2009). Characteristics and consequences of adult learning methods and strategies. Winterberry Research Syntheses, 2(2), 1-33.

Quotation References

FeedbackWiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Feedback for Learning, 70(1).

Implementation, Systems, AlignmentFixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Duda, M. A., Naoom, S. F., & Van Dyke, M. (2010). Sustainability of evidence-based programs in education. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices, 11(1), 30-46.

Straw, J., Davis, B., Scullard, M., & Kukkonen, S. (2013). The work of leaders: How vision, alignment, and execution will change the way you lead. John Wiley & Sons.

Support: Appendix


Support: Appendix

www.moedu-sail.org

Effective teaching and learning for ALL studentsMissouri Model Districts (MMD)/District Continuous Improvement (DCI)

district continuous improvement framework (mmd/dci) · p. 2 district continuous improvement...

Documents