SISEP IN ILLINOIS INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT August 7, 2009 Directors Conference...

SISEP IN ILLINOIS

INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

August 7, 2009Directors’ Conference

Peoria, IL

The Science and Practice of Implementation

Karen A. Blase, PhD Dean L. Fixsen, PhD, George Sugai, PhD,

Rob Horner, PhD, Michelle Duda, PhD, Melissa Van Dyke, LCSW

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2008

Problem We’ve lit a thousand pilot lights and

have yet to have a heating system

What will it take to make statewide use of education innovations that produce increasingly effective outcomes for the next 50 years?

Start with the end in mind


Implementation

Using implementation science at a State level

Implementation of “scaling up” in a State, rather than implementation of evidence-based practice in a school


Scale Up

To scale up interventions we must first scale up implementation capacity

Building implementation capacity is essential to maximizing the use of EBPs and other innovations

Large scale, real time change

Implications for SISEP

The Science of Implementation

The Practice of Implementation

The Work of Change at Many Levels

» Teacher / Schools

» Region / Districts

» Bureaucracy / Systems

Solution

Effective intervention practices and programs

+

Effective implementation practices

=

Good outcomes for students

No other combination of factors reliably produces desired outcomes

There are Challenges

Science to Service Gap

What is known often is not what is adopted

Implementation Gap■ What is adopted often is not used with

fidelity and good effect

■ What is implemented disappears over time and with staff turnover

Positive Intervention Outcomes ≠ Implementation

Implementation has not been achieved by doing more or better research on interventions.

The usability of a program or practice has nothing to do with the weight of the evidence regarding that program

–“Evidence” on effectiveness helps you select what to implement for whom

–“Evidence” on outcomes does not help you implement the program


Insufficient Methods

■ Diffusion/dissemination of information by itself does not lead to successful implementation

■Training alone, no matter how well done, does not lead to successful implementation

■Policies and funding alone do not lead to successful implementation

Teaming of Purveyors with Implementation Teams

Schools

Management (leadership, policy)

Administration (HR, structure)

Supervision (nature, content)

Teachers

State & Federal Context

Regions / Districts

Sta

te M

anag

emen

t

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

eam

s

Simultaneous, Multi-Level Interventions

Implementation

Successful scale-up requires attention to the science and practice of implementation

Requires change at the

Practice Level (Teachers/Educational Staff)

Organization Level (Principal, Supervisor, District Administrators)

System Level (SEA, Funders, Government, Regulatory Bodies)

Implementation Frameworks

Multi-dimensional, Fully integrated

Implementation Drivers

Implementation Stages

Implementation Teams

Improvement Cycles

Readiness for Change

© Fixsen & Blase, 2008

Student Benefits

Performance Assessment (Fidelity)

Coaching

Training

Selection

Com

pete

ncy

Implementation Lens

OUTCOMES(% of Participants who Demonstrate Knowledge,

Demonstrate new Skills in a Training Setting, and Use new Skills in the Classroom)

TRAININGCOMPONENTS

Knowledge SkillDemonstration

Use in the Classroom

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%

Joyce and Showers, 2002


Sobering Observations

"All organizations [and systems] are designed, intentionally or unwittingly, to achieve precisely the results they get." R. Spencer Darling

Business Expert

“The tyranny of the status quo.” Fritz Oser Educator



Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data System

Com

pete

ncy O

rganizationStudent Benefits



Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data System

Com

pete

ncy O

rganizationStudent Benefits

Leadership

Adaptive

Technical

Integrated & Compensatory






Improvement Cycles


Stages of Implementation

Exploration

Installation

Initial Implementation

Full Implementation

Innovation

Sustainability

Implementation occurs in stages:

Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005

2 – 4 Years

Exploration:Making the Adoption Decision (or not)

What happens during Exploration to develop readiness for change?

Assess capacity, resources, “fit” and “buy-in”

Awareness, garnering support (parents, teachers, stakeholders, leaders, champions)

Describe risk and help partners manage risk

Identify schools or classrooms comfortable with their ability to manage risk

Assess the accessibility of knowledge experts – who knows the innovation

Installation

Installation Stage Goal

To make the structural and instrumental changes necessary to initiate services

Installation

Initiating infrastructure by planning and executing for:

Interviewing Protocols

Training to Deal with Staff Turnover

Staff and Program Evaluations

Outcome Measures and Data Systems

Identifying Administrative Issues

Identifying Broader Systems Issues

Installation Process

State Management Team

Secure required staff (n=11)

Select Transformation Zone

Preparation for Initial Implementation

State Management Team

Monthly meeting of SMT and ISSA

Develop working relationships – prepare for serious problem solving

Address policy issues and barriers as they arise

Select a Transformation Zone

A vertical slice of the education system – from the classroom to the Capitol Small enough to be manageable and

large enough to include all aspects of the system

Reinforce strengths, surface and solve issues, manage risks and change processes


Transformation Zone

State Department

Districts

Schools

Teachers/ Staff

Effective Practices

AL

IGN

ME

NT

Federal Departments

SIS

EP

/ Im

ple

men

tati

on

Tea

ms

FORM SUPPORTS FUNCTION


Initial Implementation Goal

Survive the Awkward Stage!

» Learn from Mistakes

» Continue “buy-in” efforts

» Manage expectations


Activities

Provide new services, curriculum, interventions

Manage transition & turnover

Manage change process– Change practice

– Change classroom, school, and District structures & culture

– Put infrastructure components in place

– Overcome fear & inertia

Full Implementation

Full Implementation Goals

Maintaining and improving» Service» Linkages» Support» Infrastructure

Components integrated, fully functioning Skillful Service Ready to be evaluated re: consumer

outcomes

Innovation

Innovation

First do it right (high fidelity)

Then do it differently and better

» Consult with content experts

» Model the Master

» Evaluate Impact

» Institutionalize Innovations

Ability to retain function while changing form given turnover, changing needs and context

Sustainability

Goals of Sustainability Ensure funding streams for service and infrastructure

Ensure high fidelity and positive outcomes through infrastructure improvement and maintenance

Characteristics and Activities Starts during Exploration Stage, never stops

Part of every stage

Information and trust

Achieve and tout good outcomes

Remain financially vigilant

Expand support base during all stages






Improvement Cycles


Implementation Science

Letting it happen

Recipients are accountable

Helping it happen

Recipients are accountable

Making it happen

Implementation teams are accountable

Based on Greenhalgh, Robert, MacFarlane, Bate, & Kyriakidou, 2004

Initiating and Managing Change

Implementation Team(s) General Definition: Core group of individuals,

who are representative of the stakeholders and “systems” and who are charged with guiding the overall implementation from exploration through to full implementation

Benefits: Provides a focused and accountable structure to increase the likelihood that this effort will not be abandoned or derailed.

Scope of the initiative determines the scope of authority and the need for linked Implementation Teams

State Management

Group

State Transformation

Team

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

First Regional Implementation

Team



Team



Team


IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY FOR

SCALING UP EBPs

SIS

EP

Su

pp

ort

+ 2

FT

E

Too many overqualified

people

IL Regional Structure

Regional ImplementationTeam

District “A”•District Coach•District Team

District “B”District Coach•District Team

District “C”•District Coach•District Team

IL District Structure

District LeadershipTeam

District LevelCoach

School “A”•Internal Coach•School Team

School “B”Internal Coach•School Team

School “C”•Internal Coach•School Team






Improvement Cycles


PDSA Cycles

Shewhart (1924); Deming (1948); Six-Sigma (1990)

Plan – Develop specific things to do

Do – Do them (make sure)

Study – See what happens

Act – Make adjustments

Cycle – Do over and over again until the goal is reached (again)

Policy Practice Feedback Loops

Policy (Plan)

Practice (Do)

Structure

Procedure

Policy

Practice

Form Supports Function at every level (National, State, District, Region, School, Classroom)

Fee

db

ack

Stu

dy - A

ct






Improvement Cycles


Creating the Conditions for Change

Provide Information What is the change, why now, and what might it mean for me?

“Reflect” Concerns In a neutral way, acknowledge and validate the person’s

concerns (e.g. “It sounds like you need more information…”, “It makes sense to me that you are wondering about whether this is a passing fad…”)

Roll with Resistance Resistance is a signal to change strategies New perspectives are invited but not imposed (e.g. “Would you

like the opportunity to learn more about this?”) The person’s perspective is a valuable resource in learning more

about what is concerning or challenging about the change initiative

Miller and Rollnick, 1991

SISEP IN ILLINOIS

INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

August 7, 2009Directors’ Conference

Peoria, IL

Integrated SystemforStudent Achievement

Evidence-based practices are integrated into one cohesive system making education:

Easier

More effective

More efficient

Integrated System for Student Achievement

RtI

SACPBIS

ISTACSEL

Literacy

Common Core Concepts

Integrated Systemfor Student Achievement

A coordinated system of the Illinois State Board of Education in which evidence based practices are braided together to develop an infrastructure that maximizes:

Student achievement

Family – Community Partnerships

Professional Develop/Coaching

District Commitment and Leadership

Data Driven Decision Making

Evidenced Based Practices

Team based implementation of a Multi-Tiered Model

From Parallel Play to Integrated Systems

If you knew then what you know now, what would you do differently?

Implementation Politics vs. Implementation Science

Centralized statewide network

Hierarchy for consistency

Lessons Learned

District Level Commitments Long-range commitment COACHING!

» District F.T.E. commitment– District Level Coaches

» Funding

Sequence of Training

Assessment Tools

Leadership Teams

Learning Community

Continuous Regeneration


One integrated universal approach

Built out on core concepts

One integrated training sequence

4-5 evaluation tools

One statewide structure for support

Integrated Training

Team of people representing: SAC

Reading First

PBIS

SEL

ASPIRE

CHOICES

IATTAP

RtI

Integrated Training Sequence

Introduction and Overview

Coaching

Developing Your Universal System

Implementing Your Universal System

Evaluation


School Improvement

EvidenceBasedPractices

No Child Left Behind

SISEP IN ILLINOIS INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT August 7, 2009 Directors Conference...

Documents

Transcript of SISEP IN ILLINOIS INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT August 7, 2009 Directors Conference...