Transcript Implementation Science - Michelle Duda 8-27-12

Leading Systems
Development for the
Implementation of
the Common Core State
Standards
Santa Clara County
Office of Education
Michelle A. Duda, Barbara Sims,
Dean L. Fixsen, Karen A. Blase,
August 2012
National Implementation Research Network
FPG Child Development Institute
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Outcomes for this Institute
• Strategies to help Explore and Assess System Readiness
for Whole Scale Implementation
• Tools to help Examine critical elements of implementation
for CCSS that lead to sustainability
• Considerations for Establishing highly effective District
Implementation Teams
• Develop short and long term Systems Plan for CCSS
Implementation
Our Broader Goals
• Reliably Produce
• Predictable outcomes for children,
families and communities
– (i.e. achieving outcomes defined by the CCSS)
• That improve every year
• For the next 50 years
Education
Complex environments with:
Unpredictable people
Competing demands
Shifting priorities
Various points of view
The Challenge
FACT
Students cannot
benefit from
interventions
they do not
experience
FICTION
Good science
(evidence-based
practices)
leads to
Good practices
(implementation science)
National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP)
WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE?
The Challenge….
• Science to Service Gap
– What is known is not what is adopted to help
students
• Implementation Gap
– What is adopted is not used with fidelity and good
outcomes
– What is used with fidelity is not sustained for a
useful period of time
– What is used with fidelity is not used on a scale
sufficient to broadly impact student outcomes
Implementation
Implementation
Gap
Implementation is defined as a specified set of activities
designed to put into practice an activity or program of
known dimensions.
RESEARCH
PRACTICE
GAP
IMPLEMENTATION
Why Focus on Implementation?
SO THAT, ALL students CAN benefit from
interventions they DO experience
Implementation Science
Implementation
Science
Implementation science is the scientific study of
variables and conditions that impact changes at
practice, organization, and systems levels;
changes that are required to promote the
systematic uptake, sustainability and effective use
of evidence-based programs and practices in
typical service and social settings.
~Blase and Fixsen, 2010
National Implementation Research Network
Implementation
Science
Implementation Science
IMPLEMENTATION
INTERVENTION
Effective
Effective
NOT Effective
from Mark Lipsey’s 2009 MetaanalyticInconsistent;
overview of the primary
factors that
effective
Notcharacterize
Sustainable;
juvenile offender interventions –
Actual
outcomes
Benefits“. . . inPoor
some analyses, the
quality with which the
intervention is implemented
Unpredictable or
Poor outcomes;
has been as strongly related
NOT Effective
poor outcomes; to recidivism
Sometimes
effects harmful
as the
type of program, so much so
that a well-implemented
intervention
ofon
an inherently
(Institute of Medicine, 2000; 2001; 2009; New Freedom
Commission
Mental Health, 2003; National Commission on Excellence
in Education,
less efficacious
type can
1983; Department of Health and Human Services, 1999)
outperform a more efficacious
one that is poorly
implemented.”
Data Show These Methods, When Used
Alone, Do Not Result In Implementation
As Intended:
– Diffusion/ Dissemination of information
– Training
– Passing laws/ mandates/ regulations
– Providing funding/ incentives
– Organization change/ reorganization
Necessary But Not Sufficient
Implementation
ofScience
School Reform
Implementation
Longitudinal Studies of a Variety of Comprehensive School Reforms
Evidencebased
Actual Supports
Years 1-3
Outcomes
Years 4-5
Every Teacher
Trained
Fewer than 50% of
the teachers
received some
training
Fewer than 10% of
the schools used the
CSR as intended
Every Teacher
Continually
Supported
Fewer than 25% of
those teachers
received support
Vast majority of
students did
not benefit
Aladjem & Borman, 2006; Vernez, Karam, Mariano, & DeMartini, 2006
SISEP 2012
Implementation Math
Effective
Interventions
The “WHAT”
Effective
Implementation
The “HOW”
Positive
Outcomes
for Students
Implementation Science
Implementation
Research:
A Synthesis of
the Literature
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (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).
HTTP://NIRN.FPG.UNC.EDU
Plan
Change
Plan for
for Change
• It is not a “school problem”
• District is the point of entry for school
improvement
– Use short-term infusion of resources
– Establish long-term, district-based capacity for
quality
Shifting Accountability
Accountability
Shifting
Student
SISEP 2012
Practitioner
System
Making
Happen
Making It Happen
• Letting it happen
– Recipients are accountable
• Helping it happen
– Recipients are accountable
• Making it happen
– Purposeful use of implementation practice and
science
– Implementation system is accountable
Based on Hall & Hord (1987); Greenhalgh, Robert, MacFarlane, Bate, & Kyriakidou
(2004); Fixsen, Blase, Duda, Naoom, & Van Dyke (2010)
SISEP 2012
“Making
Happen”
Making It Happen
• To successfully implement and sustain
evidence-based and evidence-informed
interventions, we need to know:
– The WHAT - What is the intervention
(e.g.
effective instruction, effective assessment)
– The HOW - Effective implementation and
sustainability frameworks (e.g. strategies to change
and maintain behavior of adults)
– The WHO – Organized, expert implementation
assistance
How: Effective
Effective Implementation
Implementation
How:
• Changing the behavior of educators and
administrators
• Creating the setting conditions to facilitate
these changes
• Creating the processes to maintain and
improve these changes in both setting
conditions and behavior of well-intentioned
adults
• So that students benefit
Active
Implementation Frameworks
Frameworks
Active
Implementation
• Theory of Implementation
– Based on extensive analysis and review of
evaluation literature
• Best Practices
– Intensive concept mapping
– Nominal group processes
– Structured interviews
Active
ActiveImplementation
ImplementationFrameworks
Frameworks
•
•
•
•
Testable Hypotheses
Organize Implementation Knowledge
Identify Gaps
Guide Development of Implementation
Capacity
Lesson 5
Implementation Frameworks
Practice, program and systems change
through…
Multi-dimensional, Fully integrated
• Implementation Drivers
• Implementation Stages
• Implementation Teams
• Improvement Cycles
Work of Implementation
Changing the thinking and behavior of:
• Adult human service
professionals (teachers, staff)
• Administrators in
organizations (Principals,
Assistant Principals)
• System directors, policy
makers, and funders (District
Staff, SEA)
positive outcomes
are more frequently
created for students
So
that
structures, cultures,
and climates change
to support new ways
of work
implementation is
supported and
outcomes can be
achieved
Active Implementation
Frameworks
 Implementation
Teams
 Improvement Cycles
 Implementation Drivers
 Implementation Stages
IMPLEMENTATION TEAMS
Organized, expert assistance to develop
and sustain an accountable structure
WHO will do the work?
•Purveyors – a group of individuals representing a program or
practice who actively work with organizations and communities
to help them implement that practice or program with fidelity and
good effect
•An Intermediary Purveyor Organization that becomes expert in
implementation and a “bridge” or expert with multiple EBPs (a
new way of doing T & TA) connecting providers and purveyors
•“Local” Implementation Team with the knowledge, skill,
freedom, and authority to act (e.g. within a larger organization or
a collaboration of agencies)
Implementation Teams
IMPLEMENTATION
INTERVENTION
Impl. Team
Effective
NO Impl. Team
80%, 3 Yrs
14%, 17 Yrs
Making it Happen
Letting it Happen
Helping it Happen
Fixsen, Blase,
Timbers, & Wolf, 2001
Balas & Boren, 2000
Green & Seifert, 2005
Implementation Teams
Organized Expert
Support
• Provide accountable structure to move
intervention through stages of implementation
• Scope of the initiative determines the
development of linked Implementation Teams
and communication protocols
Linked Team Structures
State-based
Implementation
Team
Regionally-based
Implementation
Team
District-based
Implementation
Team
School-based
Implementation
Team
“We tend to focus on snapshots of isolated
parts of the system and wonder why our
deepest problems never seem to get solved.
(Senge, 1990)
Implementation Team:
Sphere of Influence
Prepare & Work with
Counties, Communities
Prepare Staff &
Administrators
State, Tribe
Create Readiness
Implementation
Teams
T/TA, Purveyors &
Researchers
Assure
Child and
Family
Benefits
Family &
Stakeholders
Assure Implementation
Implementation Teams
Membership
• Teams whose members collectively represent
the “system as is” and the “system to be”
 Know the innovation(s) very well (formal and practice
knowledge)
 Know implementation very well (formal and practice
knowledge)
 Know improvement cycles to make intervention and
implementation methods more effective and efficient over
time
 Promote and participate in systems change at multiple
levels to create hospitable cultures, policies, and funding
streams
What does this mean for us?
• Implementation Teams ensure local
capacity
• Attend to systems alignment
• Representation from those who know the
“what” and the “how”
• Use improvement cycles for purposeful
adjustments
Reflection
Supporting
New Ways of Work
Implementation Teams
• Do you currently have an
Implementation Team?
• Who are members you might
include on your
Implementation Team?
Active Implementation
Frameworks
 Implementation Teams
 Improvement Cycles
 Implementation Drivers
 Implementation Stages
IMPROVEMENT CYCLES
Changing on purpose to support the new
way of work
Improvement Cycles
Changing on Purpose
People, organizations, and systems
• Cannot change everything at once (too big; too
complex; too many of them and too few of us)
• Cannot stop and re-tool (have to create the new
in the midst of the existing)
• Cannot know what to do at every step (we will
know it when we get there)
• Many outcomes are not predictable
Trial & Learning
Improvement Cycles
PDSA Cycles
1. Rapid cycle problem solving (Shewhart;
Deming)
2. Usability testing (Neilson; Rubin)
3. Transformation Zones
4. Practice-policy communication loops
Improvement Cycles
SISEP 2012
Rapid Cycle
Problem Solving
Improvement Cycles
SISEP 2012
Usability Testing
Improvement Cycles
Usability vs. Pilot
Testing
Usability
• Clear description of the
program
• Trial and learning
approach
• Small number of
participants with multiple
iterations
• Rapid cycle problem
solving applied to
program and system
Pilot
• Clear description of the
program
• Trial and learning
approach
• Sufficient number of
participants and sufficient
time to realize potential
results
SISEP 2012
Improvement Cycles
Transformation Zone
• A “vertical slice” of the service system (from
the classroom to the District, Region, State)
– The “slice” is small enough to be manageable
– The “slice” is large enough to include all aspects
of the system
– The “slice” is large enough to “disturb the
system” – a “ghost” system won’t work.
Policy
Practice
Feedback Loops
Policy
Policy Enabled Practices
(PEP)
Feedback
Practice Informed Policy
(PIP)
Study - Act
Expert Implementation Support
Policy (Plan)
Structure
Procedure
Practice (Do)
FORM SUPPORTS FUNCTION
Practice
♦Look for Faulty
Assumptions &
Errors; ♦Make
Needed Changes;
♦Invite System to
Respond
Implementation
Team
Teachers
Innovations
Students
Practice Informed
Policy
Executive
Management
Team
Policy Enabled
Practice
“External” System Change Support
System Alignment
Adaptive Challenges
• Duplication
• Fragmentation
• Hiring criteria
• Salaries
• Credentialing
• Licensing
• Time/ scheduling
• Union contracts
• RFP methods
• Federal/ State laws
What does this mean for us?
• Change is difficult
• Improvement Cycles provide a process for
change
• PDSA cycle is used so we get better and
better
• Practice-Policy Feedback Loops promote
hospitable environments for effective
practice
Reflection
Supporting
New Ways of Work
Improvement Cycles and
Communication Loops
• How can we make use of
improvement cycles in
developing and implementing
our improvement activities?
• Linking Communication
Protocols
Active Implementation
Frameworks
 Implementation Teams
 Improvement Cycles
 Implementation
Drivers
 Implementation Stages
IMPLEMENTATION DRIVERS
Common features of successful
supports to help make full and
effective use of a wide variety of
innovations
Implementation Drivers
What are Implementation
Drivers?
Mechanisms to:
• Develop, improve, and sustain one’s ability to
implement an intervention to benefit students.
(Competency Drivers)
• Create and sustain hospitable organizational
and systems environments for effective
educational services. (Organization Drivers)
• Ensure continuous improvement cycles are
moving information forward and information
backward to improve alignment overtime
(Leadership Drivers)
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Systems
Intervention
Coaching
Facilitative
Administration
Training
Integrated &
Compensatory
Selection
Decision Support
Data System
Leadership
Technical
Adaptive
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Competency
Drivers
Competency Drivers
Build Competency and Confidence
• Develop, improve, and sustain competent
& confident use of innovations
Reliable Benefits and Consistent Use
of Interventions
You are
here
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Systems
Intervention
Coaching
Facilitative
Administration
Training
Integrated &
Compensatory
Selection
Decision Support
Data System
Leadership
Technical
Adaptive
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Competency Drivers
•
•
•
•
Measure fidelity
Ensure implementation
Reinforce staff and build on strengths
Feedback to agency on functioning of
– Recruitment and Selection Practices
– Training Programs (pre and in-service)
– Supervision and Coaching Systems
– Interpretation of Outcome Data
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Coaching
Training
Selection
Integrated &
Compensatory
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Competency Drivers
•
•
•
•
•
Selection
Select for the “unteachables”
Screen for pre-requisites
Set expectations
Allow for mutual selection
Improve likelihood of retention after
“investment”
• Improve likelihood that training, coaching,
and supervision will result in implementation
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Coaching
Training
Selection
Integrated &
Compensatory
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Staff Training
Training
100%
Collins, S. R.,
Brooks, L.E.,
Daly, D.L.,
Fixsen, D.L.,
Maloney, D.M., &
Blase, K. A.
(1976)
Percent of TI Components
Demonstrated
90%
80%
70%
60%
PRE
50%
POST
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
N=7 N=6 N=3 N=7 N=8 N=9
A
B
C
D
Workshops
E
F
Competency Drivers
•
•
•
•
Timeliness
“Buy-in”
Knowledge acquisition
Skill Development
Training
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Coaching
Training
Selection
Integrated &
Compensatory
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Training and Coaching
OUTCOMES
% of Participants who Demonstrate Knowledge, Demonstrate
New Skills in a Training Setting,
and Use new Skills in the Classroom
Knowledge
Skill
Demonstration
Theory and
Discussion
10%
5%
0%
..+Demonstration in
Training
30%
20%
0%
…+ Practice &
Feedback in Training
60%
60%
5%
…+ Coaching in
Classroom
95%
95%
95%
TRAINING
COMPONENTS
Joyce and Showers, 2002
Use in the
Classroom
Competency Drivers
•
•
•
•
Coaching
Ensures fidelity
Ensures implementation
Develops clinical and practice judgment
Provides feedback to selection and
training processes
• Grounded in “Best Practices”
Drivers are Integrated and Compensatory
Performance
Assessment
Coaching
Training
Selection
Staff Competency Drivers
Organizational Change
All organizations [and
systems] are designed,
intentionally or
unwittingly, to achieve
precisely the results they
get."
© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2008
R. Spencer Darling
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Systems
Intervention
Coaching
Facilitative
Administration
Training
Integrated &
Compensatory
Selection
Decision Support
Data System
Leadership
Technical
Adaptive
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Organization
Drivers
Organization Drivers
Change Organizations and Systems
• Create and sustain hospitable
organizational and system environments
for effective services
Implementation Drivers
What do we need to
know about
successful
organizational change
and system change
methods?
Creating
Capacity
Change
Creating
Capacityfor
for Competent
Competent Change
• New innovations do not fare well in old
organizational structures and systems
• Develop new position descriptions and job
functions in State Departments of Education
and in Regional and District systems
• “Systems trump programs.”
Patrick McCarthy, Annie E. Casey Foundation
Organizational Drivers
Decision Support
Data Systems
• Improves student outcomes through data-based
decisions
• Provides information to assess effectiveness of
intervention and prevention practices
• Analyzes the relationship of fidelity to outcomes
• Guides further program development
• Engages us in continuous quality improvement
• Celebrate success
• Be accountable to consumers and funders
Organizational Drivers
Facilitative
Administration
• Facilitates installation and implementation of the
Drivers
• Aligns policies and procedures
• Takes the lead on Systems Interventions
• Looks for ways to make work of practitioners and
supervisors more effective and less “burdensome”!!
Organizational Drivers
Systems Intervention
• Identifies barriers and facilitators for the new
way of work
• Creates an externally and internally
“hospitable” environment for the new way of
work
• Contributes to cumulative learning in multi-site
projects
What do we know about
System Stability?
EXISTING SYSTEM
Effective Innovations are
Changed to Fit the
System
Or
Operate in the Shadows
(The “Ghost” System)
What do we know about Effective
System Stability?
EXISTING SYSTEM
Effective Innovations are
Changed to Fit the
System
Or
Operate in the Shadows
(The “Ghost” System)
EXISTING SYSTEM IS
CHANGED TO SUPPORT
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
THE INNOVATION
(“Host” System)
EFFECTIVE INNOVATION
Reliable Benefits and Consistent
Use of Interventions
Performance
Assessment (Fidelity)
Systems
Intervention
Coaching
Facilitative
Administration
Training
Integrated &
Compensatory
Selection
Decision Support
Data System
Leadership
Technical
Adaptive
© Fixsen & Blase, 2007
Leadership
Drivers
Leadership Drivers
• Different challenges call for different strategies
– Technical Strategies
– Adaptive Strategies
Leadership Drivers
Strategies
• According to Ron Heifetz and his colleagues at
Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, one of
the biggest mistakes “leaders” make is to
incorrectly identify the type of challenge they are
facing
– Using technical approaches for adaptive issues
(and vice versa)
The Flow of the Work
ADAPTIVE
PDSA
PDSA
TECHNICAL
Leadership Drivers
Technical Challenges
• Perspectives are aligned (views, values)
• Definition of the problem is clear
• Solution and implementation of the
solution is relatively clear
• There can be a “primary” locus of
responsibility for organizing the work
Leadership Drivers
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Technical Strategies
Use established norms/ goals
Define problems
Provide solutions
Clarify roles and responsibilities
Assign tasks
Manage conflict
Maintain order
Leadership Drivers
Adaptive Challenges
• Legitimate, yet competing, perspectives
emerge
• Definition of the problem is unclear
• There are different perspectives on the
“issue” at hand
• Solution and implementation is unclear and
requires learning
• Primary locus of responsibility is not a single
entity or person
Leadership Drivers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Adaptive Strategies
Get on the Balcony
Identify the Adaptive Challenge
Regulate Distress
Maintain Disciplined Attention
Give the Work Back to the People
Protect All Voices
Ron Heifetz, Leadership without Easy Answers,
1996
Benefits of
of Driver
Driver-Based
Benefits
Based
Action Planning
Planning
Action
• Infrastructure needed becomes visible to
all
• Strengths and progress get celebrated
• Next right steps are planned and results
measured
• Resources can be aligned and repurposed to improve implementation
Reflection
Supporting
New Ways of Work
Implementation Drivers
• Do we need to promote
‘competence and confidence’ of
educators? How can we build instate capacity to select, train,
coach, and assess performance
well?
• How are we engaged in promoting
more hospitable organizational
environments?
• Do we have support of
leadership? How do we know?
Active Implementation
Frameworks
 Implementation Teams
 Improvement Cycles
 Implementation Drivers
 Implementation
Stages
STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION
Purposeful matching of critical
implementation activities to the stage of the
process
Stages of
Implementation
AWARENESS
TRANSITION
FULL IMPLEMENTATION
Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005
EXPLORATION
Integrated &
Compensatory
Leadership
Stages of
Implementation
Stages of Implementation
Exploration
• Exploration Stage Goals
– Create readiness for change
• Changing hearts and minds
– Examine degree to which the proposed
strategies and practices meet the needs of our
State and our students
– Determine whether adoption and
implementation are desirable and feasible
“Pay now or pay later.”
Stages of Implementation
Exploration
What happens during Exploration?
• Formalize Team Structures
• Develop Communication Plan
• Determine Need and Identify Options
• Assess “Fit” and Feasibility
• Promote “Buy in” for the innovation and for
implementation supports
• Make recommendations
SISEP 2012
Assessing Evidence-Based
Programs and Practices
Need in the Educational Setting,
Socially Significant Issues,
Parent & Community Perceptions of Need,
Objective Data indicating Need
Need
Fit with current -
Capacity
Staff meet minimum qualifications
Able to sustain Implementation Drivers
• Financially
• Structurally
Buy-in process operationalized
• Educators
• Administrators
• Families
Fit
•Initiatives
• RtI Implementation
• School and District Priorities
• Organizational structures
• Community Values
Capacity to Implement
Readiness
Qualified purveyor
Expert or TA available
Mature sites to observe
# of replications
How well is it operationalized?
Are Imp Drivers operationalized?
Intervention Readiness
for Replication
EBP:
Resource
Availability
5 Point Rating Scale: High = 5; Medium =
3; Low = 1. Midpoints can be used and
scored as a 2 or 4.
High
Medium
Low
Need
Evidence
Fit
Resources Availability
Resources
Curricula & Classroom
Materials,
IT requirements,
Staffing,
Training and PD,
Data Systems,
Coaching & Supervision,
Administrative & system
supports needed
Evidence
Outcomes – Is it worth it?
Fidelity data
Cost – effectiveness data
Number of studies
Population similarities
Diverse cultural groups
Efficacy or Effectiveness
Evidence
Readiness for Replication
© National Implementation Research Network- 2009
Capacity to Implement
Total Score:
Reflection
Supporting
New Ways of Work
Selecting Interventions
• What role can you play in
supporting effective selection
of interventions?
•
Analysis of Evidence-based Programs or
Practices “aka” hexagon tool
Integrated &
Compensatory
Leadership
EXPLORATION
Stages of
Implementation
Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005
Stages of Implementation
•
•
•
•
•
•
Installation
Structural and functional changes are made
Selection protocols developed
First implementers selected
Define and initiate training of first implementers
Develop coaching plans
Evaluate readiness and sustainability of data
systems
Stages of Implementation
Installation
What’s Needed:
• High-level protection, problem solving, and
support
• Reduced expectations and higher costs
during start up
• Help in evolving organizational supports at
every level
• Help in establishing new school, community,
and organizational climate and culture
INITIAL
IMPLEMENTATION
Integrated &
Compensatory
Leadership
EXPLORATION
Stages of
Implementation
Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005
Stages of Implementation
Initial Implementation
– Get started, then get better!
• Learn from mistakes
• Celebrate progress
• Continue “buy-in” efforts
• Make systemic changes
• Manage expectations
– All the components of the program or
innovation are in place and the
implementation supports begin to function.
Stages of Implementation
Initial Implementation
• Work through the Awkwardness
– Managing Change
– Managing Expectations
• Provide training and coaching on the
evidence-based practice, re-organization
of school roles, functions and structures
• Make use of improvement cycles to
resolve systems issues
FULL
IMPLEMENTATION
2-4
Years
Stages of
Implementation
Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005
Stages of Implementation
Full Implementation
– Maintaining and improving skills and activities
throughout the system
– Components integrated, fully functioning
– Skillful practices by front line staff, supervisors,
administrators
– Changes in policy that are reflected in practice at
all levels
– Ready to be evaluated for expected outcomes
Stages of Implementation
Full Implementation
• “What Change?....This is our way of
work!”
– Skillful Teaching and School Practices
– Skillful Use of the Drivers
• Drivers experience their own Improvement Cycles
– Data Systems in use, reliable, efficient, and used
for Decision-Making at multiple levels to
regenerate and improve
– Policy to Practice and Practice to Policy
Feedback Cycles
Reflection
Supporting
New Ways of Work
• What are you already doing
that is “stage-based”?
• What are the facilitators and
barriers to doing stage-based
work?
– Stages of Implementation Analysis
What will it Take?
California Common Core
State Standards
• District level system change
– Information, what it is, is not
– Stakeholder buy-in,
– Application/selection process
• Informed agreement, understand and
defend the initiative
What will it Take?
California Common Core
State Standards
• District level system change
– Give lots of rationales
– Not a project, not patchwork
– Focus on CCSS functions
– Establish a common vocabulary to ease
communication
– Build on what folks are doing already – help
them get ready for change
What will it Take?
California Common Core
State Standards
• Guided development
– Leadership involvement (require more in the
future)
– Year of training with follow up coaching (require
more on-site visits in the future)
– Include leaders in the training (well informed,
able to explain and defend, willing to do what is
required)
What will it Take?
California Common Core
State Standards
• Manage expectations and pace based on
Stage of Implementation
• Teachers & Staff directly impact students
• It is the job of principals, superintendents,
and funders to align policies and structures
to facilitate effective teacher & staff practices
There is no such thing as an “administrative decision” –
they are all education decisions
The Work of Implementation
• Changing the behavior of education system
professionals is hard work
• It requires a systematic approach to support
behavior change of
–Teachers,
–School and district personnel
–TA providers,
– State department of education personnel
• It requires both effective practices/programs (the
“what”) and effective implementation processes
(the “how”)
Stay
Connected!
www.scalingup.org
@SISEPcenter
SISEP
For more on Implementation Science
http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu
www.implementationconference.org
For More Information
Michelle A. Duda, Ph.D., BCBA-D
[email protected]
Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC
http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/