Research School Network: Unpacking a School’s Guide to Implementation Part 4: Delivery

In our series of blogs on EEF guidance report Putting Evidence to Work: A School’s Guide to Implementation, we’ve now reached Recommendation 5: Support staff, monitor progress, solve problems, and adapt strategies as the approach is used for the first time. The report includes a useful set of checklist questions and these from the basis of our reflections on this section of the guidance report. The focus here is on ensuring that an intervention doesn’t just end, fade away or mutate into something ineffective.

Are we able to respond to challenges that arise during the initial stages of using a new approach? Can we use existing structures and processes or are novel solutions required?

There are challenges that are foreseeable and some which may not be. For example, it is normal for staff changes to impact on implementation which means new staff have to be hired or trained. This can be planned for in the original design of the training and support materials. Another foreseeable challenge is the desire for staff ​‘buy-in’. Often this comes when signs of success emerge, but these may not be immediate. If suitable time is given and support for teachers to implement a new initiative, then it is more likely to meet with goodwill. The success initially can be seen in having clear and achievable short-term measures, which will have been carefully designed in the original plan.

Inevitably, despite time spent on planning, there are some curveballs thrown in implementation. The example given in the guidance report is ​“a new practice may require videoing teaching in the classroom raising concerns among staff, parents, and students…a meeting of parents may need to be called to work through any concerns regarding videoing in the school.” By their nature, these unforeseen issues cannot be planned for, and are rarely met with an easy and obvious solution. In such cases, school culture counts and an adaptive form of leadership is necessary. In these instances, the clearly defined active ingredients and measures, carefully planned from the outset, need to be reconsidered and communicated again.

Is appropriate follow-on support available to embed new skills and knowledge developed during initial training, in the form of coaching, mentoring, and peer-to-peer collaboration?

Training alone is not enough to secure effective implementation. The report recommends a number of follow up activities to support:

• Create opportunities for explicit discussions around how to apply new ideas and strategies to classroom practice and adapt existing practices.
• Model the delivery of new skills and strategies.
• Encourage staff to deliberately practice specific skills and apply what they have learnt by experimenting back in the classroom.
• Structure in time for reflection on the success of experimentation and what can be improved next time.
• Observe classroom practice and provide regular and actionable feedback on performance and implementation.
• Provide ongoing moral support and encouragement.

Expert coaching and mentoring can support this, but there are certain qualities of effective coaches which are a prerequisite: they offer support in a constructive, collaborative manner; they provide challenge; they have the trust of colleagues and school leaders; they have significant experience working with teachers (more than 5 years) and expertise across multiple areas. Peer-to-peer collaboration such as Professional Learning Communities can also be effective but there is less clarity about what makes these effective.

Is the intervention being implemented as intended? Are the active ingredients being observed in day-to-day practice?

If these measures are built into the plan, then it should be relatively straightforward to identify if this is happening. Read our previous blog about defining the active ingredients.

Does implementation data suggest we need to adapt our implementation strategies?

Generally, outcomes for students are better when implementations are carried out with fidelity – implemented as intended by the developers. These can be structural elements (e.g. training delivered) or dynamic (strategies implemented correctly in lessons). However, there is a balance between fidelity to the exact implementation of the plan as written and the pragmatic way that school leaders need to make changes during the process. We should combine some aspects of faithful adoption with intelligent adaption. If there is too much adaption initially, there can be a lack of impact, especially when key active ingredients are removed or changed. So, schools should be quite rigorous with the active ingredients until they are securely understood. Only then, should adaptions be made.

Next – Sustain