Research School Network: Implementation at Pace Mark Miller, Head of Bradford Research School, asks how we can implement effectively when time is not on our side

One of the key features of effective implementation is taking time. Out of the six recommendations in the EEF’s Implementation Guidance, four refer to the things that should happen before implementation. And there is an emphasis throughout on the need to take your time:

When schools are having to adjust at pace to the new normal and then the new new normal, is the guidance report obsolete? On the contrary: even in the current climate, the guidance report can provide clarity.

Culture is key

Recommendation 2 states that we should ​‘Create a leadership environment and school climate that is conducive to good implementation’. In a culture where the norm is a gradual lead in to new initiatives and interventions, teachers and leaders are used to considering the important elements of their plans. And because this is the typical way of doing things, it’s more likely to be something that can be brought into a situation where you have to move at pace. 

Should you be in a position where there is not an implementation culture in the school, it doesn’t mean you can’t get things done. You can begin to create that culture – even at pace- by modelling the elements of effective implementation such as…

Making evidence-informed decisions on what to implement

Some of the broader decisions in schools are made for you when it comes to the Covid-19 situation. There is a need for some kind of home learning; there are knowledge gaps to close; there is a need to train staff in new ways of working. But there are still many decisions about what exactly to implement, even within a tightly defined area, and this should be evidence-informed. When looking at the evidence, the guide encourages leaders to:

• Build a rich evidence picture
• Get beyond the surface
• Focus on the ​‘how’ as well as the ​‘what’
• Be an intelligent consumer
• Integrate research evidence with professional judgement

And we should remain faithful to these, especially when working quickly. 

Let’s imagine that we are a school trying to make a swift decision about their remote learning approach. We can’t build a rich evidence picture of research from a global pandemic, but we can look for evidence reviews based on similar situations, such as the EEF’s Remote Learning Rapid Evidence Assessment, which aimed to investigate methods that schools could use to support remote learning. The NFER’s Pupil Engagement in Remote Learning report is another example that can be useful. The evidence picture includes the school’s own data, including insights and evidence of what has been effective. Schools can also aim to draw on external evidence of what has been shown to work in similar contexts.

We need to get beyond the surface because ​“a shallow engagement can lead to inappropriate, and potentially even harmful, interpretations.” For example, recommendation 3 from the EEF rapid evidence assessment states that ​“Peer interactions can provide motivation and improve learning outcomes.” But, beyond the headline, the nuance is clear: ​“The value of collaborative approaches was emphasised in many reviews, although notably many studies involved older learners.”

Focusing on the ​‘how’ as well as the ​‘what’ means looking for the ​‘active ingredients’ of remote learning. While some will start with seeing if a particular platform is best, the ​‘active ingredient’ focus helps to define those non-negotiables. In this case, it is around the features of effective teaching rather than the specific platform.

The intelligent consumer knows that there are limitations to this evidence review. It was rapid, was based on different situations, and it looked at meta-analyses rather than all of the original studies. So we have to integrate research with evidence with our professional judgement and we can move forward with decision making informed by the evidence.

Readiness

We have covered the ​‘explore’ part of the above diagram, and now what about ​‘prepare’? Normally, we ask questions about readiness well in advance of implementation. Here we often have no choice but to be ready. However, the following questions from the implementation guidance can still be used when moving at pace: 

• Who are key individual and organisational stakeholders who need to be involved in the implementation process? In what ways?
• Are these staff sufficiently skilled? If not, does our plan contain the appropriate blend of professional development activities? 
• How motivated are staff to engage in this change process? How well does the innovation align with our shared educational values? 
• Are we able to make the necessary changes to existing processes and structures, such as timetables or team meetings? 
• What type of administrative support is required? Who will provide it? 
• What technical equipment is needed to deliver the innovation? 
• How will we collect, analyse, and share data on implementation? Who will manage this? 
• Does the intervention require external support that needs to be sourced outside of the school? And crucially… 
• What can we stop doing to create the space, time, and capacity for the new implementation effort?

They will help you to identify bottlenecks and issues that will make things more difficult in the future. So while you cannot practically prepare to implement the strategy in the usual structured way (by creating a shared understanding of the implementation process, providing appropriate support and incentives, introducing new skills, knowledge, and strategies with explicit up-front training and preparing the implementation infrastructure) you can at least prioritise particular elements.

You can find the guidance report, along with a range of supporting resources here.