Improvement Research Using an Improvement Science Methodology with Liberatory Design Mindsets and Practices (Poster 3)

• In Event: Mapping the Landscape of Improvement Research: Representing Diverse Approaches Using a Common Grammar

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this poster is to represent improvement research in education through a longitudinal study (2017-2014) of multiple schools within one large district using Design Improvement for Equity (DI4E), an improvement science process embedded with liberatory design mindsets and practices.



Perspective

Improvement science has intellectual/historical roots in the work of Deming and Shewart as well as in healthcare (Yurkofsky, 2020). Improvement science commonly engages educators in problem-solving in teams using a model of improvement anchored in six core principles (Bryk et al., 2015; Hinnant-Crawford, 2020). Liberatory Design mindsets and practices lead noticing and reflecting on social justice and equity-oriented processes, social conditions, and outcomes (Anaisse et al., 2021).

Modes of Inquiry

In this poster, we showcase our efforts to use DI4E in collaboration with our partners in a large school district to improve not only school-based problems aligned to school improvement planning but also continuous improvement throughout the district.

Data Sources

To construct our account of our improvement initiative, we drew on annual interviews, observations of coaching sessions and network sessions, and document review of coaching notes, team documents, and programmatic documents.

Findings

We continue representing our research activities and results using common "grammar” detailed in Poster 1.

Building the foundational conditions: We worked with teams of educators to establish the routines of DI4E in each building. Through four annual whole group convenings, we established the process, roles, and equity-orientation necessary for DI4E. Through weekly or bi-weekly coaching sessions, we provided ongoing support to schools.

Mapping the improvement space: The work of mapping the improvement space involved seeing the system with a focus on power, and oppression; engaging those closest to the problem, particularly underrepresented stakeholders; exploring the problem in context, using equity tools like the Harvard Rides assessment; and recognizing variation by including multiple perspectives at each stage of the model of improvement.

Identifying a theory of (and ideas for) improvement: The work of each school developing a theory of (and ideas for) improvement involved using causal analysis of local and empathy data, process and systems mapping data, and research and analogous settings to develop an iterative theory of improvement (aim, primary and secondary drivers, and aligned change ideas).

Iterating and measuring: The work of iterating and measuring involved testing specific interventions through Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and by tracking progress towards aim and driver measures.

Spreading and sustaining improvement: Schools shared their work in improvement reviews that explored (a) Process (where are we now? How did we get here? Where are we going?), (b) Strengths (What worked well?), (c) Opportunity (What were we struggling with?), (d) equity (How are we intentional about equity?), and (e) reflective perspective (What questions or what advice do you want from the group?).


Significance

This study shows how working with teams of teachers to enact equity-oriented continuous improvement to build new patterns of behavior, resulting in improved outcomes for marginalized student groups and enhanced the capacity of leaders to build sustainable structures for improvement.

Author

• Erin Anderson, University of Denver