Toward a Common Vision of Continuous Improvement for California

• In Event: 66.051 - Testing Continuous Improvement in Practice: Learning Locally to Improve at Scale

Abstract

Calls for continuous improvement have become central to recent conversations about educational reform in California. However, it is unclear if policymakers and education leaders share a common definition of what continuous improvement means or a clear vision of what it entails. To unpack this problem, we first offer a summary of the continuous improvement literature from education and other industries that illuminates the genesis and uptake of continuous improvement in other sectors, provides examples of successful continuous improvement efforts in education, and offers an initial set of typologies and definitions of continuous improvement. We intend for this review to highlight the long history behind the principles and application of continuous improvement and to paint a picture of what a continuous improvement approach in education might look like.
In the second part of the paper, we examine how districts in California define continuous improvement, to what extent they are engaged in continuous improvement efforts, and the barriers to and gaps in support for this work. We report on findings from 41 interviews conducted with a range of stakeholders, including state education policymakers, districts, technical assistance providers, advocacy organizations, and associations. These interviews sought to understand how various actors define continuous improvement, to what extent they are engaged in it, and how state structures are helping or hindering these efforts. Interviews were conducted during the summer of 2017 and utilized semi-structured interview protocols. To analyze, we used a multiple case study design (Yin, 2017), conducting cross-case analyses (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2013) to identify common definitions and practices across respondent groups.
We then highlight contrasts between the idealized state articulated in the first section of the paper and the current state of continuous improvement in California, focusing on the differences in understanding, investments, and resources that contribute to this gap. First, lack of a clear definition of continuous improvement stems from an insufficient understanding of the key principles and concepts that serve as its foundation. Districts tend to focus on the uptake of specific improvement tools and do not recognize that continuous improvement is at its core a management theory. Second, adopting a continuous improvement approach statewide requires a shift in the mindsets, roles, and responsibilities of everyone in the system. It is driven by the premise that organizational outcomes are the product of the system as opposed to individual will, motivation, or performance. Finally, this approach requires everyone in the system to develop new skills and capabilities. Building these capabilities takes sustained focus and investment over time, which often runs in conflict with enormous policy pressure to achieve improved outcomes virtually overnight.
This paper offers a window into the benefits and challenges of using continuous improvement in the education context as well as guidance for other state agencies interested in building the policy infrastructure necessary to cultivate the uptake of continuous improvement statewide. In addition, it contributes to the literature on the spread of continuous improvement into different industries and fields.

Authors

• Alicia J Grunow, Improvement Collective

• Heather J. Hough, Stanford University

• Sandra Park, University of California - Berkeley

• Jason Willis, WestEd

• Kelsey Krausen, University of California - Davis