Balancing Data and Reflection: Supporting Teachers in Meaningful PDSA Cycles for Equitable Instructional Improvement

• In Event: Advancing The Teaching and Learning of Collaborative Continuous Improvement in Education

Abstract

Objectives: This study investigates the challenges and opportunities afforded by CCIE efforts using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to promote reflective practice as a means for changing teachers’ instructional practices.

Theoretical framework: We draw on Cochran-Smith and Lytle’s (1999, 2009) concept of inquiry as stance, Schön’s (1983) theory of reflective practice, as well as on improvement science tools and frameworks (Bryk et al., 2015) that guide CCIE to describe teacher learning and knowledge integration. This positions educators as active constructors of knowledge, generating theory and practical implications through sustained engagement with their practice. These theories emphasize the social construction of knowledge and the importance of reflection in knowledge development, as well as the importance of data-driven insights that inform generalizable solutions.

Method: This study is part of a four-year research-practice partnership aimed at improving mathematics education across three diverse school districts surrounding St. Louis. Structured as a networked improvement community (NIC) (Russell et al., 2025), teams of administrators, coaches, principals, and teacher leaders developed a theory of improvement focused on four drivers: 1) instructional practices; 2) classroom culture; 3) curriculum and instructional resources; and 4) a coherent instructional vision with aligned instructional supports. Guided by this theory, teacher leaders used PDSA cycles (Deming, 1986) to test promising practices in their classrooms. Teacher leaders conducted and documented PDSA cycles using shared logs, including their plans, notes on what they did, a post-implementation reflection, and decisions about next steps. Participants were encouraged to use their logs to reflect on the data they collected and connect this to both their theory of improvement and next steps. We analyzed the content of 231 PDSA logs across three years of the program. The analysis focused on three areas: the presence of a written reflection; categorizing the reflection as empirical, experiential, or a combination of both (Brechin & Sidell, 2000); and characterizing the quality of reflection through a thematic analysis and reflection score.

Substantiated conclusions: We found significant variation in the documentation of reflection. When reflections were documented, 98.3% of these reflections focused on experiential data, while 56.7% focused on empirical data. Teachers drawing from both empirical and experiential data was associated with greater depth of reflection. However, reflecting on formal data presented significant challenges despite recognizing its importance alongside teacher experience. These challenges fell into three categories: time, data literacy, and mindset. To address these challenges, it is necessary, but insufficient, to encourage and support formal data collection in PDSA cycles. To promote a collaborative learning community with disciplined inquiry at the center, we used a structured group reflection protocol embedded in ongoing coaching calls to promote quality reflective practice. This coach-led protocol encouraged the use of empirical data while also remaining flexible and prioritizing practice-centered reflection over formal data collection.

Significance: Individual and community reflection are essential for teacher growth and learning (Schön, 1983; Cochran and Lytle, 1999, 2009). This study shares insights into the challenges of meaningful, contextual, and deliberative reflection and provides insights into a flexible, reflection-centered approach to addressing these challenges.

Authors

• Rachel Ruggirello, Washington University in St. Louis

• Alison Brockhouse, Washington University in St. Louis

• Gloria Pfeifer, Washington University in St. Louis