Why Continuous Improvement Is Important to Achieving Educational Equity: Two Empirical Examples

• In Event: Continuous Improvement Research and Critical Theoretical Perspectives: Bridging Two Conversations With a Common Goal

Abstract

In this presentation I am my colleagues make the case that a class of methods that live under the rubric of Continuous Improvement have the potential to address longstanding inequities in educational outcomes. Several specific approaches including Design Based Implementation Research, Implementation Science and Improvement Science, to name a few, fit this category. These approaches share, at least, three characteristics that confer this possibility to redress inequality and inequity. First these methods place the problem and the people that face them as the flywheel that energizes all technical and theoretical work. In this way the work is deeply pragmatic. Second the work takes an unabashed systems perspective. The work recognizes that the unequal outcomes we see are result multiple aspects of the educational complex, like personnel, materials, and pedagogy, working together to produce inequality. As a result, these methods aim to interrupt system performance rather than tinkering with isolated piece of the system. Third these approaches provide explicit and nameable methods that both outside others, like academics, and local people can use in common to explicitly work on problems in a scientific fashion. At its core the work is grounded in belief that you can’t plan your way out of inequity. Rather it necessary to rigorously identify problems and remove them through rigorous iterative effort. While achieving equity, equality, and social justice depend many things, we will suggest in this presentation that two aspects of individual and organizational life are paramount to attend to –– local voice and collective participation in order to make progress.

We will present results from two contexts that used Improvement Science methods to achieve noteworthy results within disadvantaged populations. First, we chart the evolution of a small CI project that focused on Credit Recovery in a majority-Latinx high school science program. This work grew into a new way for the entire science department to embed literacy into deeply into science instruction across the department. From there the work serve as an example for other departments in the school. Ultimately, the work evolved to a strategy for the whole school where CI was the centerpiece in the organization for leadership to use as both a strategy and management tool. Second, we highlight the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching working with a consortium of community colleges that has vastly increased the rate at which all students, especially black and brown students, pass developmental math classes which are the gatekeeper to higher order mathematics and to entrance to four-year colleges.

For each case we will show teachers, school, leaders and in some cases learners themselves used CI tools to engage in collective problem solving. We will also show how CI approaches were used to provide voice to locals in the problems solving settings. The results will include demonstrating that achievement, attainment or both were improved for people who took part in the effort. In addition, we will present micro data to show how these improvements are associate with specific aspects of CI process and method.

Author

• Louis M. Gomez, University of California - Los Angeles