Prepare to Launch (Instruction Partners Reading-Ch2) by Jennifer Sauriol

A highlight from the reading was the suggestion of goals/targets for Year 1 that were focused--basically what needs to be tight and what can be flexible. This was helpful for us as we transition to implementation.

2024-05-07 14:06:42 UTC

How do we support administrators to fully understand the curriculum? Even though they have been part of the process, with so much on their plates, it seems like they haven't been able to dig in to really grasp what it is. And if they don't know it, how can they best support their teachers?

2024-05-07 14:08:05 UTC

2024-05-08 15:04:32 UTC

There were goals and expectations for every possible group, not just the teachers. There were also clear expectations for use of materials, assessments, and collaboration time.

2024-05-08 15:06:04 UTC

How can we ensure that all leaders are using agreed upon look-fors and are following up with teachers to ensure they are meeting expectations? How can we build this in to our leadership meetings in a more collaborative, dynamic way?

2024-05-09 13:25:32 UTC

The way this team was able to really clarify the roles, responsibilities and expectations for different stakeholders in the process. Gave very intentional clarity for all members and ensured that, while this was a collective process, it also had specified components of individuality

2024-05-09 13:27:14 UTC

How do we ensure that teachers are able to use some of their professional discretion without compromising the integrity of the program? The case study seemed to "middle it" - it wanted to leave room for teacher autonomy, but gave a large list of mandates about when and how. Not sure it is an effective model ...

2024-05-15 15:06:08 UTC

A highlight from the reading was the section where they developed and shared principles such as requiring teachers to follow the publishers pacing guide as written, and that teachers should disregard their old pacing guides and use the new HQIM instructional materials as the only source for their daily instruction. This struck a note with us because it has been our experience in the past that teachers have not always used new curriculum materials with fidelity, and have continued to sneak in older materials that they feel more comfortable with.

2024-05-15 15:13:55 UTC

We have two thoughts about this portion of the article:

How and when do we support principals and assistant principals in learning about the new curriculum so that they can in turn support their staff? Also, when does the leadership team have time to meet to establish a success plan, an assessment plan, roles and responsibilities, guiding principles, discuss grading, create a plan for collaborative planning, meet to study the design of the curriculum, review the pacing guides ... and so on. When?

An overarching theme that was helpful to me from the reaching was how important it is to develop clear expectations and priorities to that there is something that teachers can go back to time and time again. This is summarized in the development of their clearly articulated "Principles" that were shared with teachers.

2024-06-06 10:29:11 UTC

2024-06-06 12:15:20 UTC

I took away the importance of structure - having clear, pre-set meetings and goals provides everyone with a sense of security that allows them to lean into the implementation work.

The first sentence stood out to me- the districts that experienced the greatest implementation success took their time in Phase II. We are doing a tiered implementation after experiencing this exact pitfall (moved too quickly) in another subject area.

klizotte3 — 2024-06-06 12:17:22 UTC

morse_kari — 2024-06-06 12:26:42 UTC

I appreciated the samples of roles in the vertical spine for each set of goals.

morse_kari — 2024-06-06 12:28:52 UTC

How can the expectations be communicated in a way that creates a culture of collaboration and commitment rather than compliance?

ltanner36 — 2024-06-06 12:53:09 UTC

I can't really highlight anything, it was all extremely useful and I will be using it as a guide as we begin our Launch. Reading this really inspired me and I can't wait to begin the process with our team.

maryannelynn1 — 2024-06-06 12:55:07 UTC

Recognition that an HQIM is not a magic unicorn and that the implementation team needed to develop systems that allowed for modifications (ex. determining if/where additional assessments might be given).

Collaborative approach to implementation involving all stakeholders with a strong emphasis of support from instructional coaches.

2024-06-06 12:55:18 UTC

I am wondering about how we can adapt this or what pieces we want to borrow/implement from this example given that we are not adopting one particular program for elementary science due to the structure of our science program.

Assessments

maryannelynn1 — 2024-06-06 12:56:47 UTC

It seems like the implementation of the new math curriculum would be a great opportunity to rethink/revise what assessments look like.

2024-06-06 12:58:25 UTC

Two highlights for me were the guidelines/"principles" for modifications and assessment, and the clear communication plan.

2024-06-06 13:18:39 UTC

A little granular but starting with assessments seems like a concrete step to take.

2024-06-06 13:20:13 UTC

As we look across the involved classes - Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2 - will there be a cascading implementation? Maybe over two years.

Breakout Room 4

morse_kari — 2024-06-06 13:22:30 UTC

Positives

clarity of roles
implementation was thoughtful for components

Areas for further investigation/concerns

implementing with integrity vs. providing autonomy (worry that it would create inconsistency and lack of coherence)
access points for MLL and Special Education to be included to support students to access Tier 1 instruction
engage voices in multiple ways (include family surveys)
including multiple roles and participants in the implementation vs. the same individuals