System Integration

Traditional Approach

To manage teacher development and intervention, most schools rely on an isolated, part by part, reductionist model. Each aspect of teacher effectiveness, whether related to planning, instruction, reflection, or conditions for learning is viewed, understood, and managed in parts only. The linear thinking embedded within this approach does not consider the relationships between the elemental parts that shape teacher quality, which can ultimately impact the output. There’s a believe that causality runs in only one direction. That the improvement of one “part” ensures a different, improve outcome for the entire system.

This inevitable impacts the success of teacher development, the pace of improvement, and consequently student learning. The part by part method leaves educators with a disorganized and segmented understanding of what teachers do and how to improve it.

RISE uses system-thinking to manage teacher development and school improvement. Systems help both teachers and leaders use the 30,000 ft. view to see the big picture.

Zooming out considers how other aspects outside the focus of the intervention, or beyond the learning environment influence the success of the intervention. In contrast to the part by part, mechanistic approach, the systems approach attempts to see the “forest” as well as the “trees,” rather than attending to only the trees.

RISE, Teaching and Learning Systems

Concerns such as increasing teacher quality and closing the achievement gap cannot be solved by a single actor any more than a complex system can be fully understood or improved by one part. Systems-thinking allows us to manage situations that are complex and messy. RISE uses systems-thinking to drive constructive change using a much more comprehensive approach that takes into account each of the critical elements and relationship that shape success.

Competency Development System

The Competency Development System is a hierarchical model that allows teachers to progressively improve over time. In a hierarchical system, each successive level encompasses all of the elements below it. Moving to Phase II maintain a focus on expectations at Phase I, just as a shift to Phase III requires continued focus on the expectations of Phase II & I. Using the hierarchical system, teachers are able to maintain focus on key competencies as they improve how they plan, teach, engage in formative assessment, and establish conditions for learning.

Phase I

Phase II

Phase III

Professional Learning System

Teacher development and school improvement must be viewed within a larger context to be done in an effective manner. Isolated attempts to improve teacher or school quality do not generate systemic change that permeates throughout every classroom. In addition to a focus on system-integration the Professional Learning System maintains a focus on deliberate practice, feedback, coaching, and continuous improvement. Again, success is not achieved by focusing on one a singular element. Each part of Professional Learning System has a purpose or role in improving teacher quality.

RISE School-Based Support

Staff Trainings

Phase I: Measuring Student Learning and Creating Visible Thinking
Phase II: Defining and Communicating Learning Outcomes and Activating Student Reflection
Phase III: Instructional Planning and Pedagogy
Teaming and Collaboration
Supporting SWD

Professional Learning Communities

The Work of the PLC

Developing Common Performance Scales, Learning Targets and Success Criteria
Developing Common Assessments – Formative & Summative
Developing Common Lesson Plans
Reviewing Student Work and Achievement Data
Problem Solving, Enrichment, and Intervention for Students
Reviewing Strategies, Methods, and Techniques from Professional Learning
Engaging in Instruction Observations

Study Team Classroom Observations

“A vision without systems-thinking ends up painting lovely pictures of the future with no deep understanding of the forces that must be mastered to move from here to there.”

Traditional Approach