Using Design Improvement to Facilitate Organizational Learning Through Intentional, User-Driven, Collaborative Problem-Solving

• In Event: Better Together: District-University Partnerships Responding to Educational Emergencies

Abstract

For the last three years, Denver Public Schools (DPS) and University of Denver (DU) have partnered on the development and implementation of a professional learning program based on the core principles of improvement science (Bryk et al., 2015). Design Improvement (DI) is a professional learning experience co-designed by faculty and district leaders and implemented to support schools with continuous improvement. This professional learning works with design teams, including school leaders, to move from more reactionary fixes to more generative responses that address the underlying systems. DI is a process to generate organizational learning, which requires an inquiry process to problem-solving (Argryis and Schon, 1996). A learning organization engages in inquiry with the purpose of change. Learning organizations face many challenges. Whereas some challenges require less-complex solutions, adaptive challenges or complex problems, require an inquiry-approach to thrive (Heifetz et al., 2009). The DI process begins by gaining deeper understanding of a problem and moves to theory of improvement based on an analysis of the system. From there Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycles are conducted to iterate change ideas

Present study

Over the last three years, case study research on the DU/DPS program has improved our understanding of how improvement science has been applied by leadership design teams, and what opportunities and challenges have emerged from the work. Twenty-six schools have completed the one-year professional learning experience, including 20 elementary schools, four middle schools, and two high schools. The data for this cross-case comparison study included observations of coaching sessions, which take place several times a month, and network sessions, which take place four times a year. Additionally, these data include end of the year group interviews with all participants, including design teams, faculty coaches, and district partners. Data was coded inductively by two independent coders, who open-coded a subset of data and then the research team (one faculty and two graduate students) met to agree upon the axial codes and definitions of those codes (Saldaña, 2015).

Findings

The findings help understand how DI can support school improvement. Specifically, design teams felt that DI allowed them to be more strategic with their improvement planning by being more focused, systematic, and intentional. It encouraged teacher voice, which has led to more collective learning. It also increased collaboration within and between schools through time for joint problem solving and collaborative decision-making. Furthermore, schools moved from more technical to adaptive problems and solutions, were able to systemize the problem-solving process by synthesizing the efforts within school, experienced changed mental models, and iterated solutions that addresses the needs of teachers and students. These findings support the use of IS can in education to not only solve problems of practice but also to develop an organizational culture that facilities organizational learning (Argyis & Schon, 1985; Heifetz et al., 2009). This research will help the field of education better understand context-specific, asset-based school improvement initiatives and what practices and structures support improvement work in schools.

Authors

• Erin Anderson, University of Denver

• Susan Korach, University of Denver