Practice Profile

Foundations of Math

IMPLEMENTATION TEAM

Name: MI^2 / Kate Fanelli Date: June 2015

Focused Practice: Establish and support an infrastructure that enables sustained, implementation of new practices with fidelity.

Clearly Defined Outcome/s for this Practice:

  • Support Foundations of Math instructors
  • Course implementation
  • Monitor teacher progress toward Gold Standard of implementation of teacher practice
  • Long term, permanent implementation of new practices
  • Improved student outcomes for ALL math learners
  • School professional learning culture that reflects and creates an environment of life long learning, collaborative learning, and continuous improvement.

Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Implementation teams complete the “exploration” phase of implementation.
Collaborative Inquiry (Using Data to Improve Learning for All, Nancy Love, editor, 2009) / All key stakeholdersparticipate on, and contribute to, the implementation team (e.g., teacher leader, administrator, curriculum director, etc.)
Assesses needs, using a data-driven approach with fidelity (e.g. Collaborative Inquiry)that is validated through research on the program, or is rooted in mathematically correct quantitative analysis methods.
Identifies possible programs and practices to meet those needs, validated by multiple types of data within a school (e.g. achievement, perception, demographic data) regarding the possible program/practice.
Consider the fit and feasibility of implementing and sustaining the identified program by using existing resources flexibly (i.e. using existing resources in new ways), when necessary. / Strongly encourages and supports participation and contributions of all key stakeholders on the implementation team (e.g., teacher leader, administrator, curriculum director, etc.)
Assesses needs, using a data-driven approach with fidelity (e.g. Collaborative Inquiry) at least 90% of the time that is validated through research on the program, or is rooted in mathematically correct quantitative analysis methods.
Identifies possible programs and practices to meet those needs, validated by at least two types of data within a school regarding the possible program/practice.
Considers the fit and feasibility of implementing and sustaining the identified program by looking at existing resources. / A group of people is identified as the implementation team and may be as active on that team as they wish to be. Participation and active involvement is inconsistent, or disproportionate, within the team.
Assesses needs, using a data-driven approach (e.g. Collaborative Inquiry) less than 90% of the time, or does not use the approach with fidelity (e.g. “We used our own version of this process”). Data-driven approach uses incorrect or inappropriate mathematical processes.
Identifies possible programs and practices to meet those needs, validated by less than two types of data, or based solely on something other than data.
Considers the fit and feasibility of implementing, but not necessarily sustaining, the identified program.
Considers fit and feasibility by looking at existing resources inflexibly or does not assess fit and feasibility at all.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Implementation teams completes the “installation” phase of implementation. / Develop all communication protocols needed to support implementation regarding in-building, local communication.
Allocates all financial and human resources for needed supports including training, coaching, equipment, and supplies.
The team reserves adequate and dedicated physical space where training, coaching, and other implementation activities will take place.
The team purchases, or allocates, all necessary equipment and technology for implementation and makes sure it is ready in time for implementation activities.
Ensures that necessary supports are used with fidelity to fully develop practitioner competency (i.e. training, coaching, data systems). / Where the team is not directly involved, the team follows up regularly with those responsible for making sure financial and human resources are in place and provides necessary supports to make sure this happens.
Where the team is not directly involved, they follow up regularly with those responsible for making sure adequate and dedicated physical space is reserved for implementation activities.
The team oversees the purchasing of, or allocation of, all necessary equipment and technology for implementation and makes sure it is ready in time for implementation activities.
Ensuresthat necessary supports are used consistently in buildings/classrooms,90% of the time, to fully develop practitioner competency (i.e. training, coaching, data systems). / Does not develop communication protocols needed to support implementation regarding in-building, local communication.
Identifies needed financial and human resources, but does not make sure they are in place.
Identifies less than all needed resources.
Asks other parties to ensure needed financial and human resources are in place, but does not support those parties, or does not follow up with those parties.
Adequate and dedicated physical space is not available when scheduled implementation activities take place.
Not all necessary equipment and technology are purchased, or allocated, or ready for use in time for related implementation activities.
Makes sure supports exist, but does not ensure those supports are being used at least 90% of the time or supports are not reaching intended audiences (e.g., coaches are in the buildings, but not able to meet with teachers; training is provided but attendance is optional).
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Implementation teams complete the “initial implementation” phase of implementation. / Coaching and/or PLC support happens for 100% of the participants at the gold standard level (refer to the Coaching profile).
Engages in rapid improvement cycles (i.e., addresses barriers and develops systemic solutions quickly) on a biweekly basis.
Uses a variety of data and a defined process to assess the quality of implementation, identify problems and solutions, and inform decision making at least 6 times a year (or more frequently when needed). / Coaching and/or PLC support happens for 100% of the participants at the acceptable variation level (refer to the Coaching profile).
Engages in rapid improvement cycles (i.e., addresses barriers and develops systemic solutions quickly) on a monthly basis.
Uses a variety of data and a defined process to assess the quality of implementation, identify problems and solutions, and inform decision making at least 4 times a year. / Coaching and/or PLC support is offered but not mandatory, or is mandatory but is at the unacceptable variation level (refer to the Coaching profile).
May engage in rapid improvement cycles but does not utilize systemic solutions, and/or does not utilize systemic solutions quickly.
Uses 2 or fewer data sources to identify quality of implementation.
Does not use a defined process to assess implementation.
Engaged in an evaluative process fewer than 4 times a year.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Implementation teams complete the “full implementation” phase of implementation. / Establishes, maintains and communicates about a building-wide infrastructure to support continuous learning and improvement for teachers/participants.
Integrates new learning for all levels in the classroom, building or district (e.g. the lesson plan prototype is evident in classroom lessons, is expected to be seen by administrators in lesson plan books, and are known by the district) / Establishes and maintains a building-wide infrastructure to support continuous learning and improvement for teachers/participants.
Integrates new learning for all levels in the classroom and building while keeping lines of communication open throughout the district. / Continues activities from initial implementation for an indefinite amount of time and considers that to be full implementation.
Does not establish or maintain building-wide support systems.
Recommends integration of new learning at all levels in the classroom, building or district.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Use data to inform implementation decisionsat each stage (e.g. progress, identify needs, select interventions, and monitor fidelity) / Uses data 100% of the time when making implementation decisions.
Uses a combination of summative, interim, and formative data (e.g. state standardized tests, classroom tests, formative assessment data, student work, conferences, etc.)
Uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative data, from a variety of sources (e.g., teacher observations, student test scores).
Each team member can articulate what, why, and how the data is being used. / Uses data 90% of the time when making implementation decisions.
Uses a combination of summative, interim, and formative data, but depends on just two of these types of data most of the time.
Uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative data from a variety of sources, but depends on one of these types of data most of the time.
The team, in general, can articulate what, why, and how the data is being used. / Uses data less than 90% of the time for implementation decisions.
Does not use a combination of summative, interim, and formative data.
Does not use a combination of qualitative and quantitative data, from a variety of sources.
The team uses data but cannot articulate what, why, and how the data is being used.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Meet regularly to identify and complete implementation tasks. / All team members attend 100% of the meetings and stay for the entirety.
All team members take shared responsibility for implementation tasks.
All implementation tasks are completed according to mutually agreed upon time lines. / All team members attend 90% of the meetings and stay for the majority of the meeting.
When absent, team members work diligently to get information missed and check in regarding their tasks for the next meeting.
80% of implementation tasks are completed according to mutually agreed upon time lines. / Team members attend fewer than 90% of the meetings.
Team members arrive late, leave early, or miss large parts of the meeting more than 90% of the time.
Not all team members take shared responsibility for implementation tasks.
Some tasks do not get done, or are delayed, because no one is willing to do them.
Less than 80% of tasks are completed according to mutually agreed upon time lines.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Connect with (Mi)2 to address challenges and receive updates / Identifies a communication liaison for (Mi)2.
The communication liaison communicates monthly with (Mi)2 (during usability testing) to address challenges and receive updates.
Implementation team sends (Mi)2 (during usability testing) the minutes from each implementation team meeting. / The communication liaison communicates no less than every other month with (Mi)2 (during usability testing) to address challenges and receive updates.
The communication liaison sends (Mi)2 (during usability testing) the minutes from 80% of implementation team meeting. / Does not identify a communication liaison for (Mi)2.
The communication liaison communicates less than every other month with (Mi)2 (during usability testing) to address challenges and receive updates.
The communication liaison sends (Mi)2 (during usability testing) the minutes from less than 80% of implementation team meeting.
Critical Component
(non-negotiable) / Ideal “Gold Standard” of the Critical Component / Emerging Practice
(Acceptable Variation) of the Critical Component / Unacceptable Variation of the Critical Component
Utilize program fidelity measures to improve likelihood of improved student outcomes / Utilize practice profiles on a monthly basis to communicate to stakeholders what they are supposed to know and do regarding new practice.
(during usability testing) Participate in 100% of program evaluation activities. / Utilize practice profiles on a bi-monthly basis to communicate to stakeholders what they are supposed to know and do regarding new practice. / Utilize practice profiles on less than a bi-monthly basis to communicate to stakeholders what they are supposed to know and do regarding new practice.
(during usability testing)
Does not participate in program evaluation activities.