Kathleen Ryan Jackson, SISEPKaren Blase, SISEP

National Implementation Research Network

Veronica Sullivan, SSIP Co-LeadAmanda Waldroup, SSIP Co-Lead

Division of Learning ServicesKentucky Department of Education

Systemic Improvement:Building Implementation

Capacity to Move the Indicators

SSIPJanuary 12,

2015

PDSAImplementation

PLAN – SSIP Team will use the Independent Learning Plan and Complete 3 modules by November 17th

DO – Goal: Complete the Modules by November 17th

STUDY – Percent of members completing each Module by November 17th

20% Getting Started

20% Module 1

20% Module 6

ACT – Given these results, what is the new PLAN? How can we be more supportive to the SSIP Team? What were the barriers? Advice from those who completed one or more of the modules. Turn to your partner and discuss next steps

PDSAImplementation

PLAN – KDE will send calendar reminders for completion of 3 modules by January 9th

DO – Goal: 80% Complete the Modules – Do a closed eye vote!

STUDY – Percent of members completing Modules by Jan 9th ___ % Getting Started (Dec 17)

___ % Module 1 (Jan 5)

___ % Module 6 (Jan 9)

ACT – Given these results, is there a new PLAN?

Why: Capacity to Apply the Active Implementation Frameworks

Why: Capacity to Apply the Active Implementation Frameworks

WHO

Teams

WHEN

Stages

HOW

Drivers

WHY & HOW

Cycles

WHAT

Effective & UsableInterventions

“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

WHYEducationally

Significant Outcomes

WHATEffective &

Usable Innovations

WHO &HOW Effective

Implementation

WHEREEnabling Contexts

Formula for Success

Usable Interventions An intervention needs to be teachable, learnable,

doable, and be readily assessed in practice.

Review and Discussion: Module 6

Usable InterventionsUsable Interventions

Operational Definitions

ClearDescription

PerformanceAssessment

EssentialFunctions

Essential Functions

Clear description of the features that must be present to say that a program exists in a given location

Core components

Usable Interventions

Usable Innovations

Clear Description

Philosophy, Values and Principles

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Usable Interventions

Usable Innovations

“Innovations are rarely neutral. They tend to advance or enhance the position of certain groups and disadvantage or damage the position of others.” – Ball, 1987, p. 32

“Innovations are rarely neutral. They tend to advance or enhance the position of certain groups and disadvantage or damage the position of others.” – Ball, 1987, p. 32

Operational Definitions

Describe each core component in terms that can be taught, learned, done in practice, and assessed in practice

Practice Profiles

Usable Interventions

Performance Assessment

Provides evidence that the program is being used as intended and is resulting in the desired outcomes

Fidelity

Practical enough to repeat time and time again

Usable Interventions

Implications for Sustainability and Scalability We tend to over-estimate how

well defined “it” is We find out when we start to Install

“it”

Help Districts and Schools choose wisely based on: Needs of students Best evidence Fit and resources required Readiness and resources for

replication

Usable Interventions

Implications for Sustainability and Scalability

Help Districts and Schools “operationalize” the WHAT Practice Profiles

Help Districts and Schools “make space” for the new work Supportive policies and practices

Usable Interventions

Usable Interventions: IPAC Team

Now March April

Initiative Inventory - Hexagon Tool - Practice Profiles

UsableInterventions

The HexagonAn EBP Exploration Tool

NEED

FIT

RESOURCES

EVIDENCE

CAPACITY

READINESS

Fit with current Initiatives•School, district , state priorities•Organizational structures Community values

Need in school, district, state•Academic & socially significant Issues•Parent & community perceptions of need•Data indicating need

Resources and supports for:•Curricula & Classroom•Technology supports (IT dept.)•Staffing•Training•Data Systems•Coaching & Supervision•Administration & system

Evidence•Outcomes – Is it worth it?•Fidelity data•Cost – effectiveness data•Number of studies•Population similarities•Diverse cultural groups•Efficacy or Effectiveness

Capacity to Implement•Staff meet minimum qualifications•Able to sustain Imp Drivers

• Financially • Structurally

•Buy-in process operationalized• Practitioners • Families

Readiness for Replication•Qualified purveyor•Expert or TA available•Mature sites to observe•Several replications•How well is it operationalized?•Are Imp Drivers operationalized?

The “Hexagon” can be used as a planning tool to evaluate evidence-based programs and practices during the Exploration Stage of Implementation.

Download available at:www.scalingup.org/tools-and-resources

EBP:

5 Point Rating Scale:High = 5; Medium = 3; Low = 1.Midpoints can be used and scored as a 2 or 4.

High Med Low

Need

Fit

Resource Availability

Evidence

Readiness for Replication

Capacity to Implement

Total Score

© 2009 Karen Blase, Laurel Kiser, & Melissa Van Dyke Adapted from work by Laurel J. Kiser, Michelle Zabel, Albert A. Zachik, and Joan Smith at the University of Maryland

IPAC: Vetting Kentucky’s Practices

IPAC: Vetting Kentucky’s Practices

Activity: With a partner/s explore an intervention that you are familiar with from your initiative inventory.

1. Gather information for each of the six factors.

2. Discuss information as a group: Where are the strengths?

Where are the gaps?

3. After your discussion debrief on the process:

What more do we need as a team before using this tool to vet math practices for Initiative Inventory?

Hexagon and Usable Interventions

Clear Description: •Philosophy, Values and Principles•Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Evidence:•Number of studies•Population similarities

• FIT with current initiatives• Needs of students

TEAMS: The Cascading Logic Model

Teams must be linked so the inputs at one level are the outputs at the next level.

Review and Discussion: Module 3

“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

Linked Implementation Teams

School-basedImplementation Teams

School-basedImplementation Teams

District Implementation Teams

District Implementation Teams

RegionalImplementation Teams

State-basedImplementation Teams

State-basedImplementation Teams

Implementation TeamNo Implementation Team

80%3

Years

80%3

Years

14%17

Years

14%17

Years

To “Making it Happen”From “Letting it Happen”

Sources: Fixsen, Blase, Timbers, & Wolf, 2001Balas & Boren, 2000 Green & Seifert, 2005Saldana & Chamberlain, 2012

Improvement inIntervention Outcomes

Shifting AccountabilityActive Implementation

TeachersTeachers Principal and District

Principal and District

SystemSystem

Discussion: Active Implementation and the Formula for Success

Good Intentions

Actual SupportsYears 1-3

Outcomes

Every Teacher Trained

Fewer than 50% of the teachers received some training

Fewer than 10% of the schools used the practice as designed

Every Teacher Continually Supported

Fewer than 25% of the teachers received support

Vast majority of students did not benefit

Comprehensive School Reform: Aladjem & Borman, 2006; Vernez, Karam, Mariano, & DeMartini, 2006

WHYEducationally

Significant Outcomes

WHATEffective &

Usable Innovations

WHO &HOW Effective

Implementation

WHEREEnabling Contexts

Formula for Success

Independent Learning PlanDeveloping Implementation Capacity

SISEP is not another initiative, it is an implementation framework that can be applied to any way of work

Next Steps: Module 2, 4, 5

Performance Assessment

(Fidelity)

Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data SystemC

ompe

tenc

y D

river

s

Com

pete

ncy

Driv

ers O

rganization Drivers

Organization D

rivers

LeadershipLeadership

Consistent Use of

Educational Innovations

© Fixsen & Blase, 2008Technical Adaptive

Module 2: Implementation DriversModule 2: Implementation Drivers

Module 4: Stages of ImplementationModule 4: Stages of Implementation

ExplorationWinter

2015

InstallationSpring & Summer

2015

Initial Implementation

Fall 2015

FullImplementation

Winter 2016

2-4 Years2-4 Years

Team Assesses•Needs•Fit•Resources•Buy-in•Readiness for replication•Capacity to sustainMutual selection

Team Assesses•Needs•Fit•Resources•Buy-in•Readiness for replication•Capacity to sustainMutual selection

Teams Lead•Acquire resources•Prepare organization and staff (train, coach, assess fidelity)•Build structure for sustainability

Teams Lead•Acquire resources•Prepare organization and staff (train, coach, assess fidelity)•Build structure for sustainability

Teams Lead•Manage change•Ensure all can use Data Systems•Initiate Improvement Cycles•Improve structures for sustainability

Teams Lead•Manage change•Ensure all can use Data Systems•Initiate Improvement Cycles•Improve structures for sustainability

Leads Lead•Monitor & manage change•Achieve fidelity & outcome benchmarks•Improve•Sustain and improve structures for sustainability•Replicate TZ

Leads Lead•Monitor & manage change•Achieve fidelity & outcome benchmarks•Improve•Sustain and improve structures for sustainability•Replicate TZ

Transformation Zone

Develop implementation capacity of TZ Cooperatives and a few of their districts and schools

KDE identifies 3 CooperativesEach Coop identifies 2-3 districtsAssess willingness, needs, fit etc. Engage in mutual selection processCoops attend SISEP training once a month

Example:KDE Exploration

What: Transformation Zone

A transformation zone focuses on innovations and implementation infrastructure development

A transformation zone can be thought of as a “vertical slice” of the education system

From the classroom to the district (capital)

The “slice” is small enough to be manageable but large enough to include all aspects of the system so the “slice” can be replicated

Why: Transformation Zone

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 continuing the existing)

Cannot know what to do at every step (we will know it when we get there)

Implementation Teams

Regional District

Building

TeachersStudents

Su

stai

nab

ilit

y

Pra

ctic

e In

form

s P

olic

yP

olic

y E

na

ble

s

Pra

ctice

Module 5:Practice-Policy Communication

CycleSEA

PDSA

Common definitions build a community of practice.

–Karen Blase in conference, 2015

©Copyright Dean Fixsen and Karen Blase

This content is licensed under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND, Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs. You are free to share, copy, distribute and transmit the work under the following conditions: Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work); Noncommercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes; No Derivative Works — You may not alter or transform this work.  Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0