A Model of Continuous Improvement in High Schools: A Process for Research, Innovation Design, Implementation, and Scale

Abstract

This article describes a model for continuous improvement that guides the work of the National Center on Scaling Up Effective Schools, or NCSU. NCSU is a research and development center funded by the Institute for Education Sciences, the research arm of the United States Department of Education. At the core of the Center's work is an innovative process to bring to scale practices that have been shown to improve student achievement in high schools in Broward County, Florida, and Fort Worth, Texas. To do so, the Center's model of improvement relies on three core principles. First, a prototype is built to reflect the core elements of programs or practices that have been shown to be effective locally. Second, rapid-cycle testing is used to allow the prototype to be revised in ways that adapt it to a particular school context. Third, a researcher–practitioner partnership is employed that strives to both take advantage of and build local ownership and expertise. In so doing, the continuous improvement model addresses well-known challenges faced by those attempting to scale up educational innovations, challenges such as building teacher buy-in and attending to the organizational context in which innovations are to be enacted.

Exploring the Association Between Short-cycle School Improvement Planning and Student Achievement in Underperforming Schools

“…While correlation results demonstrated slight positive associations between short-cycle SIP quality and student achievement, regression results demonstrated no significant relationship. While these results are unsurprising given the range of factors known to influence student learning, we assert that this study offers an important contribution to stand alongside the increasing prevalence of short-cycle planning and continuous improvement practices in schools (e.g., Cohen-Vogel et al, 2016; Mintrop, 2016), especially those designated as underperforming. The next sections discuss our results, particularly educational leaders’ potential unpreparedness to engage in short-cycle school improvement planning and USTP’s influence on short-cycle SIP development and quality.…”

“…(4) (Eq.8) we assert that this study offers an important contribution to stand alongside the increasing prevalence of short-cycle planning and continuous improvement practices in schools (e.g., Cohen-Vogel et al, 2016;Mintrop, 2016), especially those designated as underperforming. The next sections discuss our results, particularly educational leaders' potential unpreparedness to engage in short-cycle school improvement planning and USTP's influence on short-cycle SIP development and quality.…”

The relationship between distributed leadership and teacher innovativeness: Mediating roles of teacher autonomy and professional collaboration

“…Innovativeness is a necessary trait for all individuals since it relates to the improvement and design of a product or service, and it is widely accepted in numerous fields ( Lam et al, 2010 ). Teacher innovativeness is defined as teachers’ openness, acceptance, and internalization of creative ideas, as well as their ongoing engagement in innovation-related professional practices ( Cohen-Vogel et al, 2016 ). It is regarded as the degree of teachers’ capacity and ability to change and is also a vital contributor to enhanced teacher performance, student academic achievement, and organizational development ( McGeown, 1980 ; Serdyukov, 2017 ).…”

Implementing School Improvement Plans: Perceptions and Implications of Aspiring Principals for Educational Leadership Programs

“…Various models of organizational improvement have been outlined in the literature and applied to the school improvement process (Bernhardt, 2017; Boudett et al, 2013; Cohen-Vogel et al, 2016). Victoria Bernhardt’s (2017) Continuous Improvement Framework outlines an improvement process that relies heavily on the review and analysis of four categories of data to determine the best course of action to continuously improve a school and student outcomes: demographic, process, assessment, and perceptional data.…”

“…Boudett et al's (2013) Data Wise framework also stresses the use of an iterative cycle to improve a school and provides much guidance on how to create the conditions for collaborative teamwork and data analysis. Cohen-Vogel et al (2016) model is specific to high schools. The process begins with identifying accepted best practices from the local community, followed by quick testing of practices, and revision through faculty collaboration.…”