Category Archives: Learning and improvement

Learning and improvement

Quality Learning Tools

Leave a comment

Tools to improve the quality of learning

Educators can get very excited by Quality Learning tools. In this post we explore these tools and how to use them most effectively.

Students from Hallett Cove R-12 School in South Australia complete an Inter-relationship Digraph
Students from Hallett Cove R-12 School in South Australia complete an Inter-relationship Digraph.

What is a Quality Learning tool?

Let’s start with a definition of any tool.

A tool is a physical or procedural instrument.

A hammer is a tool, a physical instrument for driving nails. A to-do list is a tool, a procedural instrument for helping us remember what we have to get done. The internet is a tool that requires both a physical instrument (computer or smart phone) and procedures to follow to connect and gain access to information.

A Quality Learning tool is a physical or procedural instrument used to improve the quality of learning.

The Quality Learning tools have their origins in quality improvement tools, first introduced in Japan in the 1960s. These early tools, such as the check sheet, fishbone diagram and Pareto chart, were used to gather and display data with a view to improving the quality of products and services. Management tools, such as the affinity diagram, interrelationship digraph and prioritisation matrix, were developed from the 1970s.

Over the past fifty years, additional tools have been developed in the fields of management, planning, statistical analysis, design, inter-personal collaboration, creativity and thinking.

Quality Learning tools are drawn from all of these areas.

A junior primary student from Plenty Parklands Primary School describes the writing process
A junior primary student from Plenty Parklands Primary School steps through a flowchart of the class writing process.

Tools and new thinking

Tools are created to solve problems.

New tools usually emerge after thinking about a problem from a new or different perspective.

Consider brainstorming, for example. It is a simple tool. Everyone gets to suggest ideas that are recorded for everybody to see. Traditional brainstorming, however, has a number of weaknesses, including potential domination of the group by outspoken individuals and inconsistent levels of participation by group members. These factors frequently impact negatively on the quality of ideas generated.

To address these weaknesses, structured brainstorming was developed. Key differences between structured and traditional brainstorming are:

  1. All individuals are given time to think about the issue quietly and make a list of ideas they could contribute.
  2. Ideas are gathered progressively from each member of the group: one idea per person per turn, with the option to ‘pass’ on any turn.

Structured brainstorming was developed to solve the problems of traditional brainstorming.

The thinking that preceded the creation of the new tool or the new technique was inadequate; otherwise the tool would not have been needed. If the old thinking could have solved the problem, there would have been no need to develop a new tool to help understand the problem better or analyse it better. So the creation of the tool is usually a consequence of a shift in thinking.

Jim Duffy, 2015, Knowing & Applying: Breathing new life into service organisations, Deming Learning Network, Aberdeen, Scotland, p66

The Quality Learning tools are rooted in the thinking that underpins Quality Learning, namely what Deming called a system of profound knowledge. This philosophy can be summarised as the Principles of Quality Learning.

Tools can encourage everybody to have their say, usually in a structured manner. Everyone comes to understand the perspective of the group as a whole. In this way, they give voice to the silent majority while giving perspective to the vocal minority. 

A student from Theodore Primary School in the ACT explains a class Correlation Chart
A student from Theodore Primary School in the ACT explains a class Correlation Chart.

Examples of Quality Learning tools

The following table lists many of the most common Quality Learning tools. They are grouped by the key concepts of Systems, Knowledge, Data and variation, and Psychology and motivation. (Remembering, of course, that these concepts are more strongly interrelated than the following linear list of tools suggests.)

Systems thinking

  • Deployment Flowchart
  • Fishbone Diagram
  • Five Whys
  • Force-field Analysis
  • Imagineering
  • Interrelationship Digraph
  • Paper Passing Purpose Tool (P3T)
  • Parking Lot
  • Perception Analysis
  • Process Accountability Matrix
  • Purpose, Outcomes, Process, Evaluation (POPE)
  • SIPOC Modelling
  • Standard Flowchart
  • System Map
  • System’s Progress
  • Top-down Flowchart

Knowledge and theory

  • Bone Diagram
  • Gantt Chart
  • Hot Dot
  • Lotus Diagram
  • Operational Definition
  • Potential Improvement Matrix
  • Problem Statement

Data and variation

  • Affinity Diagram
  • Box and Whisker Plots
  • Control Chart
  • Dot Plot
  • Histogram
  • Measures Selection Matrix
  • Pareto Chart
  • Radar Chart
  • Run Chart
  • Structured Brainstorming

Psychology and motivation

  • Action and Agreement Record
  • Capacity Matrix
  • Code of Cooperation
  • Consensogram
  • Loss Function
  • Plus Delta

There is no definitive list of Quality Learning tools. New ones are being developed daily; old ones are being adapted to new situations. The list above provides a starting point; it may suggest tools you would like to go back to, or new ones you may wish to explore.

A student from Seaford 6-12 School in South Australia describes the use of a Gantt Chart to plan and track progress of an assignment
A student from Seaford 6-12 School in South Australia describes the use of a Gantt Chart to plan and track progress of an assignment.

Using the tools

As we work with schools and other organisations, one of the most common questions we are asked is: How do I know which tool to use, and when to use it?

The only way to predict whether a tool will be helpful in any given situation is to have tried the tool and learned from its application.

As you use a tool regularly, you come to know the situations in which it is most helpful and those in which it is not.

Learning about the Quality Learning philosophy can also help you apply the tools effectively, as it can deepen your understanding of the thinking behind the tools.

 

 

Read more about Quality Learning.

Study the Quality Learning philosophy, as described in our book Improving Learning: A how-to guide for school improvement.

Purchase Tool Time for Education or Tool Time for Business, comprehensive guides to the Quality Learning tools.

Watch a brief video about the use of Capacity Matrices in Primary School or High School.

Watch a brief video about the use of Flowcharts in High School or Primary School.

Watch a brief video about the use of a Gantt Chart in High School.

Learning and improvement

Five Whys – Identifying root causes and motivation

Leave a comment

The five whys tool was developed within the Toyota Motor Corporation as a means to identify the underlying causes of problems. When root causes are identified and addressed, the problem can be fixed and stay fixed.

Five whys can also be used to explore personal motivations.

The process is very simple: the issue under investigation is identified and noted. Examples: “Why are students disengaged from their learning”, “Why are we proposing to hold the meeting?”,  “Why are enrolments dropping?”, “Why do we come to school?”, “Why are teachers not listening?”.

“Why?” is then asked five times (the number of repetitions is not immutable, but in most cases five repetitions have been found to be sufficient).

In this example (Figure 1), year 8 students consider why they study mathematics.

Five Whys: Why do we study mathematics?
Figure 1. Five Whys: Why do we study mathematics?

Some years ago a teacher from a secondary school in Victoria told us the following story.

A class was constantly disrupted by the inappropriate behaviour of a student. Instead of responding in the usual manner by removing the child from the classroom, the teacher took the student to one side and applied the five whys tool to investigate the cause of the behaviour.

The student revealed that he found it difficult to make friends with others in the classroom, and that the behaviour was a means of getting attention and connecting with others.

The teacher worked to help the student learn strategies to develop relationships with others. This was a far more productive and longlasting solution than would have been achieved by reacting to the symptom and removing the student from the classroom.

 

Watch a video clip of a year 2 student explore why they come to school.

Watch a video clip of a year 4 student exploring the reasons her class comes to school.

Watch a case study video from a year 8 english class that includes the use of Five Whys to explore ‘Why do we study English’?

Purchase Tool Time for Education, which provides details of many improvement tools for schools and classrooms.

Read more about the quality improvement approach in our book IMPROVING LEARNING: A how-to guide for school improvement. 

Learning and improvement

Learning like a guided walk

Leave a comment

I recently had the pleasure of completing a guided walk along the Milford Track – one of the Great Walks in New Zealand. The track passes through some of the most beautiful and pristine wilderness in the world.

During the walk, I was reflecting upon the characteristics of the guided walk that made it so pleasurable. Here are my reflections…

A clear path

The 33.5 miles of track from Glade Wharf to Sandfly Point is clearly laid out and very well maintained. Throughout the walk it was crystal clear where we were meant to go; if we stuck to the track there was little chance of getting lost.

With signposts

The track is clearly and comprehensively sign-posted. Every mile there is a numbered milepost indicating progress.

The track is clear, well maintained and there are regular mile posts.
The track is clear, well maintained and there are regular mileposts.

Periodically there are signs indicating distances or estimated times to key landmarks along the route. These signs, along with the mileposts, enabled each of us to track progress and monitor the pace of our walk.

Regular sing-posts enabled us to monitor our progress
Regular sing-posts enabled us to monitor our progress

Other signs warn of potential hazards ahead, including areas of possible flooding or avalanche.

Potential hazards are sign-posted
Potential hazards are sign-posted

Taken together, these signposts ensured we knew where we were, how far we had come and still had to go, points of interest, and areas where extra care might be required.

Walking at our own pace

We were encouraged to walk the track at our own pace and to take time to explore the locations we found interesting.

We took time to explore locations of interest to us, this being the Clinton River West Arm
We took time to explore locations of interest to us, this being the Clinton River West Arm

We were also encouraged to explore some of the side tracks that had particular points of interest. This was not compulsory. The side trip to Sutherland Falls, the highest falls in New Zealand, was truly remarkable.

Sutherland Falls, the highest in New Zealand. The water falls 580m.
The base of Sutherland Falls, the highest waterfalls in New Zealand. The water falls 580m.

Walking alone, or with others

In all there were about forty of us completing this walk together.

At times I walked alone. I like to do so; it gives me time to think. There were several occasions where it felt like I was the only person on the track. I could see no-one behind or ahead of me, and I felt I had the place to myself.

At times I felt I had the track all to myself
At times I felt I had the track all to myself

At other times I walked and chatted with my niece, Helen, who had invited me to do the walk with her.

Occasionally, I walked and chatted with small groups of others, some of whom had travelled across the globe to walk this track.

Everyone was free to choose with whom they walked.

A team of professional guides

A team of four guides accompanied us on the walk. They worked extremely well as a team. I was particularly impressed with the way the acknowledged and drew upon their individual strengths while working together to build their individual and collective capability.

Getting to know us

Each of the guides was friendly and welcoming. They each took time to speak with each of us and get to know a bit about us. They genuinely cared about each walker and were keen to ensure everyone had the best experience possible while under their guidance.

As the walk progressed, they learned about our walking style, preferences and limitations. Which of us were the quick walkers, guaranteed to reach each milestone first? Which of us were likely to find parts of the walk particularly challenging?

Mackinnon Memorial at Mackinnon Pass.
Mackinnon Memorial at Mackinnon Pass. The climb up and down the pass was challenging for most of us.

Through getting to know us, the guides were able to plan and execute personalised support, where it was required.

Knowing the track

The guides know the track intimately. Collectively they had walked the track many hundreds of times.

The guides highlighted points of interest and significance along the way. They proved very knowledgeable about the flora and fauna, and took the trouble to point out and help us interpret that we were seeing. We were encouraged to be inquisitive and draw upon their knowledge and experience.

Our guides discuss implications of the weather forecast
Two of our guides discuss implications of the latest weather forecast

They also knew how we might respond to the track. They know where the going is easy. They know where it’s most demanding. They know where people may experience difficulty. They also know the hazards and have strategies to minimise the associated risks.

Helping us be prepared

Each evening one of the guides briefed us on the outlook for the following day. The briefing informed us of the terrain ahead, distances involved, weather forecast, points of interest and any potential areas requiring particular care. This enabled us to plan ahead and be prepared to meet the challenges that lay before us.

The briefings also celebrated our achievements that day.

Briefings each evening celebrated our daily achievements and prepared us for the challenges of the following day.
Briefings each evening celebrated our daily achievements and prepared us for the challenges of the following day.

Providing support, as required

At all times there was a guide at the front of the group. This guide checked the path was clear of hazards.

There was also a guide bringing up the rear, ensuring nobody was left behind. This guide provided encouragement and practical support to those walkers finding the terrain a challenge.

The other two guides walked between, within the group. When we encountered a hazard along the track, there was always at least one guide there to help us through safely. This occurred on three occasions: the first when the track was submerged in flood waters and twice where the track had been obliterated by avalanches.

Guides were always on hand to help us though hazardous sections of track, in this case the site of a recent avalanche.
Guides were always on hand to help us though hazardous sections of track, in this case the site of a recent avalanche.

Celebrating Achievement

Having walked more than 33 miles over four days, we arrived at our destination, Milford Sound. Our final briefing was more of a celebration, each of us receiving a certificate during a simple ceremony, then proceeding to enjoy a meal together.

The following morning, we were treated to a brief cruise through the  sound before we each set off on the next stages of our respective journeys.

Dawn on Mitre Peak, Milford Sound
Dawn on Mitre Peak, Milford Sound

Learning can be like this guided walk

Schooling can be like this guided walk.

A clear path

The curriculum provides the learning path. Tools such as the Capacity Matrix and Gantt Chart put curriculum in the hands of the learners and provide signposts to support learners to plan and monitoring. Areas where special care may be required can also be highlighted.

Learning at their own pace

Once the path is clear, learners can be encouraged to progress at their own pace.

Learners can also take time to explore areas of particular interest to them, adding these to their capacity matrix and recording details of their learning.

Learning alone, or with others

Students can choose when they prefer to work alone, and when they may wish to work with others. Teams and groupings are by choice, not direction.

A team of teachers

Teachers work together as a team: acknowledging each others’ strengths and working to build their individual and collective capability. They are collectively responsible for the safety and progress of the learners.

Teachers take time to get to know the learners under their guidance: the learners’ aspirations, preferences and limitations.

Teachers know the curriculum intimately. They know where it is straightforward and where many students have difficulty. They encourage curiosity, enquiry and exploration.

Teachers  equip learners with skills and tools to plan and be prepared to make the most of the learning opportunities.

Teachers provide personalised support, helping everyone who requires assistance through all sections of the track. They pay particular attention to supporting learners through sections of curriculum that most people find challenging.

Celebrating achievement

Students and teachers acknowledge and celebrate achievements along the way and in ways that are meaningful to everyone.

 

Read more about Capacity Matrices.

Watch a video showing how year 7 students learn in this way.

Watch a video showing year 10 students learning in this way.

Purchase our book, IMPROVING LEARNING: A how-to guide for school improvement, and read more.

Learning and improvement

What is your school’s learning theory?

Quote Leave a comment

What is your school’s theory of teaching and  learning?

Some schools waste time focusing their efforts on trying to control and manage the actions and behaviours of individuals. They would do better examining the underpinning theory, systems and processes driving the action and behaviour. Reflecting deeply on, and defining (making explicit), the beliefs upon which current approaches to learning and teaching are based, can lead to great focus, alignment and return on efforts to improve.

Fundamental to improving learning is to agree (define) the theory guiding our teaching and learning.

The following anthropological model adapted from the work of Martin Weisbord can help us understand why this is so. It describes a hierarchy of influences on organisational behaviour. The model is consistent with Deming’s teachings on how systems drive performance and behaviour, and the need to develop theory to drive improvement.

Weisbords Ladder
Weisbord’s anthropological model illustrating an organisational heirachy of theory driving action and behaviour

Weisbord’s model illustrates the relationship between beliefs, philosophy (theory), systems, processes, choices and action. An organisation’s systems and processes reflect and reinforce its values, beliefs and philosophy. These systems and structures dictate the processes and methods, and shape the dilemmas and choices faced by individuals of the organisation. The choices made by individuals, in turn, produce the actions and behaviours we observe.

Let’s look at an example to illustrate. Say we believe students are inherently lazy, that they have little desire to improve, and need to be motivated to learn. We will then develop systems and processes in our school and classrooms in an attempt to extrinsically motivate them. Our systems and processes will usually be based upon incentives and rewards, fear and punishment. If, however we believe we are born with an innate desire to learn and to better ourselves, and that the motivation to learn comes from within, then we will design very different systems of learning in our classrooms. These systems usually focus upon building ownership of learning, and working with students to identify and remove the barriers to their intrinsic motivation and learning.

Defining a theory and designing systems and processes can be a deliberate and thoughtful action or it can occur through natural evolution – the choice is ours.

We can make a conscious choice to define and make explicit our values and beliefs regarding teaching and learning.  An operational definition is used to achieve and document a shared understanding of the precise meaning of concept/s. Operational definitions provide clarity to groups of individuals for the purposes of discussion and action.

It follows that once we have defined our theory of teaching and learning, we can design structures, systems, processes and methods that are aligned to it and naturally promote the actions and behaviours we desire.

Of course, we draw upon evidence-based research to craft our theory. We can then work together over time testing, reinforming and reaffirming this theory, and improving systems and processes to produce the performance and behavioural outcomes we wish to see.

How to…

Our work with schools in defining a learning and teaching philosophy has typically followed the process summarised in the flowchart below. All staff are invited to be involved in agreeing the philosophy which takes place through one or more workshops.

Developing a Learning Theory Flowchart
Flowchart of a process to create a school learning theory

Step 1.  Agree a research or evidence-base to inform the philosophy

The first step is to agree and draw upon a research or evidence-base to inform the philosophy. Education systems in Australia have, over time, adopted different pedagogical models. Schools have adopted many different models, all purporting to reflect the latest research and providing the theory necessary to guide excellent teaching practice. The Quality Teaching model, the National School Improvement Tool, the e5 Instructional Model, and the International Baccalaureate are examples of pedagogical models currently in use. Explore the preferred model/s with all staff before defining your philosophy to agree which one or more resonate and align with the needs of your learning community. Of course, if there is a model that adequately describes the philosophy to teaching and learning that your school community wishes to adopt, the job is made easier. Job done – just agree to use it!

Step 2.  Brainstorm ideas

Something we tend to overlook is to recognise the ‘prior knowledge’ of our teachers. Every educator will have developed a theory – based upon their understanding and experience – as to the greatest influences on learning in their classroom. Ask staff also to reflect upon their own teaching and learning values and beliefs. We have found it helpful to express the learning and teaching philosophy as a set of (documented) principles.

To define the philosophy, ask staff to brainstorm their key learning and teaching beliefs, concepts and principles. This can be achieved by every staff member providing their input to the process by writing down their individual ideas as statements on sticky notes – one statement per sticky note.

Step 3.  Collate the ideas using an Affinity Diagram

The staff input can then be collated by creating an Affinity Diagram with the sticky notes. Headings are applied to the Affinity Diagram reflecting the agreed major themes (as in the figure below).

Learning Theory Affinity Diagram
Affinity Diagram – theming ideas for a learning theory

Step 4.  Agree theory statements

These themes can be documented as a set of agreed statements (principles). For example, the following are the principles of learning and teaching agreed to by Knox Primary School in Melbourne, Victoria.

Knox Park Primary School, Victoria Learning and Teaching Philosophy
Knox Park Primary School, Victoria Learning and Teaching Philosophy

Here is another example of an agreed learning and teaching philosophy. It is the Learning Model developed by the Leander Independent Schools District in Texas, USA.

LISD Learning Model
Leander Independent Schools District, Texas, USA Learning Model

The theory as a foundation for continual improvement

The school’s theory of learning and teaching, or principles, are then used as an ongoing reference to develop, review and continually improve consistency in policy and practice across the school. Each principle is subject to ongoing exploration through reflection and dialogue to develop deeper and shared understanding, and to inform the development of agreed learning systems and processes – the school’s pedagogical framework.

Naturally, the philosophy is dynamic. Like any theory or hypothesis, to be relevant and effective in an ongoing way, it will need to be regularly reviewed, reaffirmed or reinformed by further research and our experiences of applying it over time.

A final note

John Hattie’s research (Teachers Make a Difference: What is the research evidence? Australian Council for Educational Research, October 2003) revealed greater variation between the classrooms in an Australian school than between Australian schools. Defining the theory that will guide teaching and learning across your school is a way to reduce this variation.

To learn more…

Purchase a copy of Improving Learning: a how to guide to school improvement.

Learning and improvement

Plan-Do-Study-Act

1 Comment

Creating a theory for improvement

Continual improvement is derived, in large measure, from the efforts of individuals and teams working together to bring about improvement. For example, many schools have introduced professional learning teams (PLTs). PLTs usually involve teams of teachers working together on agreed improvement projects aimed at improving classroom learning and teaching practice.

Sadly, ‘how’ we work on these improvement efforts is frequently left to chance. The result is valuable time and effort wasted as sub-optimal solutions are derived.  So how can we make the most of these rich opportunities to improve?

The answer lies in applying a scientific approach to our improvement efforts – a structured learning and improvement process. Many know this as action learning or action research. We call it PDSA: the Plan-Do-Study-Act improvement cycle.

The history of PDSA

The PDSA cycle is attributed to the work of Walter Shewhart, a statistician working with the Bell Telephone Laboratories in New York during the 1930s (although it can be traced back further to John Dewey’s profound writings on education in the 1800’s). 

Shewhart was the first to conceptualise the three steps of manufacturing — specification, production, and inspection – as a circle, rather than a straight line. He observed that when seeking to control or improve quality, there must be reflection upon the outcomes achieved (inspection) and adjustments made to the specifications and production process.

He proposed the move from this:

The linear process of specification, production and inspection
Figure 1. The linear process of specification, production and inspection

To this:

The cycle of specification, production and inspection
Figure 2. The cycle of specification, production and inspection

You may notice similarities with the traditional teaching methods of plan, teach, and assess.

The linear approach to Plan, Teach, Assess
Figure 3. The linear approach to Plan, Teach, Assess

In recent times there has been a focus in schools on “assessment for learning” (in contrast to “assessment of learning”). It parallels Shewhart’s observation of the need to close the loop in manufacturing.

Shewhart went on to identify the three steps of manufacturing as corresponding to the three steps of the dynamic scientific process of acquiring knowledge: making a hypothesis (or theory), carrying out an experiment, and testing the hypothesis (see Figure 4).

The three steps of acquiring knowledge
Figure 4. The three steps of acquiring knowledge

Source: Adapted from Walter Shewhart, 1986, Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control, Dover, New York, p. 45.

With these thoughts, Shewhart planted the seeds for W. Edwards Deming to develop the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, which was published as the Shewhart cycle in 1982. Deming taught the Shewhart cycle to the Japanese from 1950 who picked it up and renamed it the Deming Cycle.

The PDSA Cycle

Deming published the cycle in The New Economics in 1993, as the Plan–Do–Study–Act (PDSA) cycle. He changed “check” to “study” in order to more accurately describe the action taken during this step. PDSA is the name by which the cycle has become widely known in recent times. (Figure 5.)

The Deming Cycle
Figure 5. The Deming Cycle

Source: W. Edwards Deming, 1993, The New Economics: For industry, government, education, MIT, Cambridge.

The Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle is a structured process for improvement based on a cycle of theory, prediction, observation, and reflection.

There are, of course, many variants of the improvement process, with many and varied names. In overview, the concepts are the same.

There is a strong tendency for people to want to race through the “plan” stage and get straight into the “do” stage. Schools in particular find it difficult to make time for the reflective step of “study”. Many individuals and teams just want to get into the action and be seen to be making changes, rather than reflecting on whether the change has been an improvement, or just a change.

A detailed and structured process

Where an improvement opportunity is of a significantly complex nature, a comprehensive application of the PDSA process is necessary.

Our work in industry, government and education over the past two decades has shown the nine step PDSA process, illustrated in Figure 6, to be particularly effective. This nine step process has been compared with dozens of alternate models of PDSA and refined over the past two decades.

A nine step PDSA process
Figure 6. A nine step PDSA process

In developing such a process, there is a balance to be struck between the technical considerations of having a robust process that will deal with diverse contexts and issues, and the simplicity that makes the improvement process accessible and practical for busy people. Over the years, we have continually sought to simplify the model to make it more accessible. For nearly a decade, the nine steps have remained constant, but the specific actions and tools comprising each step have been progressively refined.

The process has beed designed to ensure it meets the criteria necessary to achieve sustainable improvement, namely:

  • Be clear about mutually agreed purpose
  • Establish a shared vision of excellence
  • Focus upon improving systems, processes and methods (rather than blaming individuals or just doing things)
  • Identify the root causes of dissatisfaction, not the symptoms
  • Carefully consider the systemic factors driving and restraining improvement, including interaction effects within the system and with containing systems
  • Identify strengths to build upon as well as deficiencies to be addressed
  • Identify the clients of the improvement efforts and understand their needs and expectations
  • Achieve a balance in addressing the competing, and sometimes contradictory, needs and expectations of stakeholders in improvement efforts
  • Be clear about the theory for improvement, and use this to predict outcomes
  • Reflect on the outcomes of improvement efforts, in the context of the selected theory for improvement, in order to refine the theory for improvement
  • Use operational definitions to ensure clarity of understanding and measurement
  • Not copy others’ practices without adequate reflection about their proper implementation in a new context — adapt not adopt.

These requirements have been reflected in the nine step PDSA improvement process shown in Figure 6.

To provide clear guidance, we have developed a comprehensive PDSA chart (Figure 7). The PDSA improvement process is framed as a series of questions to be answered by the improvement team (or individual). These questions address the considerations necessary to achieve sustainable improvement as detailed above. The process also refers the user to specific quality learning tools that can be used to address the questions, promoting collaboration and evidence-based decision-making.

A detailed nine-step PDSA cycle
Future 7. A detailed nine-step PDSA cycle

This is not a perfect process for improvement — there is no such thing. It is a process for improvement that can be adapted (not adopted), applied, studied, and improved. It can be used as a starting point for others, like you, who may wish to create a process of their own.

There are enormous benefits to applying a standard improvement process: an agreed improvement process that everybody follows. This can be standard across the school or whole district. Everyone can use the same approach, from students to superintendent. The benefits, apart from maximising the return on effort, time and resources, include having a common and widely used model, language, set of concepts, and agreed tools.  It also establishes an agreed process that can itself be reviewed and improved, with the contribution of everybody in the organisation.

 

Watch a video of PDSA applied to year one writing.

Watch a video of PDSA applied within a multi-age primary classroom.

Read or watch a video about student teams applying PDSA to school improvement.

Download the detailed nine-step PDSA chart.

Purchase IMPROVING LEARNING: A how-to guide for school improvement to read more about the quality improvement philosophy and methods.

Purchase our Learning and Improvement Guide: PDSA Improvement Cycle.

 

Learning and improvement, School improvement, Working on the system

Using ADRI during school self-assessment

Quote Leave a comment

Using ADRI during school self-assessment

The assessment dimensions of Approach-Deployment-Results-Improvement (ADRI) can be very helpful for self-assessment. ADRI provides a structure under which the activities and results of an organisation can be broken down to identify, quite specifically, where the strengths and opportunities for improvement may lie.

ADRI provides a structured approach to organisational self-assessment. The ADRI dimensions help you to analyse how your organisation goes about: thinking and planning (Approach); implementing and doing (Deployment); monitoring and evaluating (Results); and reviewing and improving (Improvement).

It is a feature of the Australian Business Excellence framework and underpins many other performance excellence frameworks around the world.

ADRI Review Process
ADRI Review Process Poster for Self-assessment

Source: Adapted by QLA from the Australian Business Excellence Framework, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards Criteria and the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence Model.

The ADRI assessment dimensions

Approach

Approach relates to the thinking and planning behind the area of endeavour – how it has been designed.

Considering an Approach leads to an examination of:

  • clarity of purpose
  • clients, key stakeholders and their respective needs
  • desired outcomes – the vision of excellence
  • design of strategies, structures and processes to meet the desired outcomes
  • identification of measures of success.

In most organisations the senior leaders, sometimes with the support of content specialists, determine the approach.

For example, senior leaders of a school, frequently with the help of a specialist curriculum committee, usually lead the approach to curriculum. It is the responsibility of these leaders to identify and make clear the purpose of curriculum in the school, the desired curriculum outcomes for the school, and to understand the needs of key stakeholders (including teachers, families and curriculum regulatory bodies). Armed with this understanding, the structures and processes (including documentation) necessary to meet the intentions of the school can be designed. It is during the design stage that the measures of success are also determined from the desired outcomes (the vision of excellence): what data will be used to monitor progress over time? Senior leaders do the thinking and planning – the design.

Deployment

Deployment relates to implementing and doing – how the design is put into effect.

Considering Deployment leads to an examination of:

  • the degree to which the designed strategies, structures and processes have been implemented across the organisation and down through the organisation
  • the extent to which staff understand and have embraced the organisation’s approach
  • how well the strategies, structures and processes have been integrated into the day-to-day operation of the organisation.

Those doing the daily work know most about how the daily work is done. Those that are expected to implement an organisation’s approach know most about it has been deployed. The school curriculum committee may have designed an excellent approach, but it is up to each classroom teacher to implement it. If classroom teachers are not adhering to the agreed school curriculum approach, it has not been deployed well.

Results

Results relates to monitoring and evaluating – how success is gauged.

Considering the Results dimension leads to an examination of:

  • how performance is monitored
  • how the data relating to the measures of success (determined as part of the Approach) are collected, collated and reported
  • the degree to which trends of improvement are evident in these data.

Monitoring and evaluating is a management responsibility. School leaders are responsible for monitoring and evaluating the data used as measures of success for their approach to curriculum. Unless these data are collected, collated and reported, the effectiveness of the approach and its deployment will be unknown.

Improvement

Improvement relates to the processes of reviewing and improving the approach and its deployment.

Considering the Improvement dimension leads to an examination of:

  • the process by which the appropriateness and effectiveness of the approach and its deployment are reviewed
  • how these reviews have led to improvement
  • how the lessons learned are captured and shared.

Improvement is a management responsibility. Continuing the school curriculum example, a school’s senior leaders are expected to regularly review and refine the school’s curriculum. This assessment dimension examines the process by which that is undertaken, the improvements that have resulted and how these improvements are documented and shared with staff and other key stakeholders.

Why ADRI is useful

The assessment dimensions are useful for two purposes: diagnosis and design.

Diagnosis

When something is not working well in an organisation, ADRI provides a lens for examining activities and results to determine why it isn’t working and then to determine what to do about it.

When things aren’t going well, it could be because:

  1. the Approach is weak
  2. the Deployment is poor.

If the approach is weak, attention must be paid to reviewing and improving the design. Deploying a poor approach will not deliver good results.

A sound approach, poorly deployed, will not deliver good results either. If the approach is well thought through but is not being applied, then attention needs to be paid to ensuring people know about and implement the agreed approach.

Note that these two causes – a weak approach and poor deployment – have the same effect: disappointing results. Yet the actions required to address the disappointing results are quite different. ADRI can assist in determining which cause is more significant.

For example, a school may identify parent dissatisfaction with student reports. Firstly, knowledge of ADRI would lead the school leadership team to seek clarity and reflect upon the school’s design for assessment and reporting. Which assessments are to be undertaken? What is the schedule? What is the agreed process for reporting? Is the approach appropriate? These are questions regarding the approach. Secondly, they would explore the extent to which the approach is being applied in practice. Do staff understand and follow the agreed procedures? Are timelines being met? These are questions regarding deployment. Actions required to address parent dissatisfaction will be quite different depending where the opportunities for improvement lie: in the approach, or more to do with deployment.

Design

ADRI is also useful when designing organisation’s systems, structures and processes. In thinking about how to pursue any area of endeavour, ADRI provides useful guidance to ensure key considerations are not overlooked. If you look back over the considerations associated with each of the dimensions, you can easily identify key questions to be answered when determining how to design processes that will achieve an organisation’s goals. These questions could include:

  • Have we clearly articulated our purpose, desired outcomes and a vision of excellence?
  • What are the needs of our clients and key stakeholders?
  • What strategies, structures and processes are required to achieve our aspirations?
  • What data do we need to measure effectiveness and track progress over time? How will these data be collected, collated and regularly reported?
  • How will we document, train and coach people to adopt the new approach?
  • How will we monitor the acceptance and application of the new approach?
  • How will ongoing performance data be monitored and evaluated?
  • What is the cycle of review and improvement for this approach and its deployment?

How to use ADRI

The assessment dimensions of ADRI can be used in many ways. Typically, they are used as:

  1. a checklist for reflecting upon the activities and results of an organisation
  2. a framework for describing the activities and results of an organisation
  3. an assessment model to evaluate the activities and results of an organisation.

ADRI is commonly used as a checklist to think about what is happening in an organisation. For example, thinking about whether observed difficulties are due to a deficient approach or poor deployment is a common application.

ADRI can provide a structure for describing how an organisation goes about its business. This use of ADRI is common in performance excellence awards processes such as those based on the Australian Business Excellence Awards, the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards in the USA, and those of the European Foundation for Quality Management. Organisations describe explicitly how they go about each assessment dimension for each area of endeavour. The areas described are usually the categories or items of these specific frameworks (for example, Leadership, Strategy and Planning, Customers and Other Stakeholders). The use of ADRI in this way is applicable to any area of organisational activity.

A school (or district) could use ADRI as a structure to describe any program, initiative, project or other area of endeavour. For example; a district could document its thinking and planning (approach) to community engagement, how that has been implemented across the district (deployment), how data demonstrate effectiveness in community engagement (results), and the process by which the district reviews and improves community engagement (improvement). The act of documenting the activities and results in this structure usually leads to the identification of strengths and areas of opportunity for improvement.

ADRI can also be used to evaluate or rate the organisation’s activities and results. The figure above, ADRI Review Process Poster for Self-assessment, which you can download free of charge from our website, provides a structure for such an evaluation. Each of the four dimensions, ADRI, is evaluated and given a rating, which leads to identification of strengths and opportunities for improvement.

How does ADRI relate to PDSA?

The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, provides a step-by-step process to bring about improvement over time. ADRI provides specific dimensions to reflect upon the activities and results of an organisation at a specific point in time.

Both PDSA and ADRI are based on the learning and improvement cycle, also known as scientific method and action research. PDSA provides a method for realising improvement. ADRI provides a structure for identifying where improvement may be required.

How to find out more…

Download the PDSA 9-step Improvement Process poster.

Download the ADRI Review Process poster.

Read more about the learning and improvement cycle in our new book: IMPROVING LEARNING: A how-to guide for school improvement.

Leading improvement, Learning and improvement

A recipe for building an expert teaching team

Leave a comment

Do you need a step-by-step guide to targeting professional learning to develop your expert teaching team? Then follow these simple instructions to establish an evidence-based, structured process to plan,  monitor and evaluate the professional development of staff in your school:

Warwick Fraser and his digital portfolio
Warwick Fraser explains how he uses his Capacity Matrix and Digital Portfolio
  1. Download a capacity matrix template. You can use the matrix in either hardcopy or digital format.
  2. Agree with staff what they need to know, understand and be able to do to be effective in their school roles. Identify the specific skills and capacities as they relate to key concepts and methods. Insert them into the matrix template. Draw on preferred models and professional standards like the AITSL Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Be sure to also include the capacities unique to your school system (e.g. do you have a school-based data software people need to know how to use, a behaviour management policy, a role call process?). 
    Also consult your Strategic and Annual Plans for new developmental needs and these capacities to the matrix. In this way the matrix is a dynamic (ever evolving) document subject to ongoing review and improvement.
  3. Have each staff member undertake a regular self-assessment using the matrix. This self-assessment can be made an integral part of your school staff performance management/development process.
  4. Staff (like younger learners) are required to provide evidence of their learning. Evidence is recorded in the evidence column of the matrix. Staff can use a portfolio to store their evidence (in the same way as students do). This can take many forms; video footage or podcasts of teachers demonstrating good teaching practice, photos, students articulating their learning. This evidence is an effective measure of the extent to which professional learning is ultimately applied in the classroom.
  5. Use the capacity matrix to identify individual learning goals and monitor progress towards achieving them.
  6. Use the matrix as a basis for the induction of new staff.
  7. Use the matrix to plan ongoing professional development. Identify those areas where a majority of staff require professional development and plan the most cost-effective way for this to be facilitated. For example, those staff who have reached mastery (or are at the wisdom level) in specific capacities can teach, coach or mentor those at lower levels of learning.

National Teacher Stds Capacity Matrix Ver1 03Jul12

Here are some we prepared earlier!

Want to know more…?

Learning and improvement, School improvement

2 Ways Students Can Lead School Improvement

2 Comments

Students have a great deal to contribute to school improvement.

We made this point in a previous blog post What the school improvement Gurus are not yet talking about.

Many schools are currently promoting ‘student voice’ – a feature of many school improvement models.  However our experience shows that this rarely extends beyond a Student Representative Council where a few selected students have the responsibility to collect periodic feedback from students or engage with school fundraising activities. This is a limited view of student voice.

Quality Learning theory emphasises the importance of working together to improve and involving the ‘worker at the front line’ in improving the system. In schools this is the student.

Student contribution begins in the classroom

Students’ potential to lead improvement begins in the classroom. Every student can reflect upon what helps him or her to learn and what hinders learning. Students, with their teacher, can use Quality Learning tools to share, explore and prioritise these driving and restraining forces. A Parking Lot is a good way to collect this data on an ongoing basis. (See our previous blog post Put up a Parking Lot!)

John Hattie in his book Visible Learning (2009) discusses feedback as in the ‘top 10’ greatest influences on student learning. He emphasises the importance of of student-to-teacher feedback (not just the more commonplace teacher-to-student kind).

Based on considered student feedback, teachers and students can jointly design and trial changes to classroom processes, with the aim of improving learning. The class can evaluate the effectiveness of these changes over time. The changes can then be:

  • adopted as ongoing practice;
  • adapted, modified and trialed again;
  • or abandoned.

In this way, students engage in the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle of learning and improvement.

PDSA Cycle
Plan-Do-Study-Act Cycle, as described by Dr W Edwards Deming

Engaging students in classroom improvement like this has four key benefits.

  1. Teachers can learn a great deal from listening to their students discuss what helps and hinders their learning. This also develops student metacognition and builds capacity in ‘learning how to learn’.
  2. Engaging students in the PDSA cycle of improvement teaches them a practical ‘how to’ approach to improvement, which they can then apply to their own opportunities for improvement. These lessons have practical application beyond schooling.
  3. Engaging students in improving their own situation builds student ownership of the process and outcomes. The teacher has the active support of students in developing, trialling and evaluating a jointly developed theory for improvement.
  4. If the trial is successful, student learning will improve. If it is not successful, students have benefited from experience with the PDSA cycle. An alternative theory can be developed and trialled.

Student contribution to whole-school improvement

In addition to contributing to improving learning in the classroom, students have a significant contribution to make to whole-school improvement. In most schools, this potential remains unexplored, let alone realised.

There are many more students than adults (teachers, administrators and support staff) in most schools. While student-teacher ratios vary enormously by school type and sector, it is generally true that students outnumber adults by more than five to one in most schools. In some places, the ratio is more than ten to one.

The adult populations in schools are diverse; this is even more so for most student populations. There is a rich diversity of backgrounds, languages, cultures, experiences and skills in both the adult and student populations in all schools. This is more pronounced in some schools than others, but it is always present. (Such is the nature of variation in social systems).

Yet in most schools, school improvement is the domain of adults alone.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

The enormous potential of student creativity remains untapped in most schools. Young people have not yet learned some of the constrained thinking that we tend to acquire through life. Students can ask the obvious questions that we don’t even see and have ideas for improvement we could never dream of.

Hallett Cove R-12 School
Student Improvement Teams

Students can lead and participate in improvement teams to address key issues of concern.  We have worked with student teams over many years on school, community and industry-based improvement projects. They have never failed to do a remarkable job.

Students from the Student Leadership Team at Hallett Cove R-12 School in South Australia recently participated in a rigorous process of school improvement using the PDSA cycle.

Ten teams were formed looking at issues that affected them within their school.

Student teams worked out how to make things better, not just different. They wanted things to get better, and stay better. They made considered recommendations for sustainable improvement.
Student Improvement Teams from Hallett Cover R-12 School, South Australia

The objectives of the process were for students to:

  • learn more about the Quality Learning approach to improvement
  • learn first-hand about managing and improving organisations
  • develop skills in teamwork, goal setting, time management and communication
  • reflect upon and share what was learned
  • make significant improvements to the school and classroom!

The process comprised three phases:

  1. Training Day
  2. Four-day PDSA School Improvement Experience
  3. An Evaluation Meeting.

The Training Day introduced the knowledge and skills needed to participate in the improvement process. This training included the Principles of Quality Learning and some of the Quality Learning tools.

Phase 2 was where the bulk of the work was done. Students analysed a school situation or process, using the PDSA cycle and Quality Learning tools, to understand the system, identify root causes, develop solutions and make recommendations. To do this the used the following process (and tools):

1 Select the team

1.1 How will team members work together? (Code of Cooperation)

1.2 How will the team keep track of ideas and issues? (Parking Lot)

2 Clarify the opportunity for improvement

2.1 Precisely what is the opportunity for improvement? (Problem Statement)

2.2 Who are the clients and what do they need? (Perception Analysis)

3 Study the current situation

3.1 What is the current process flow, policy and/or state of relationships? (Deployment Flow Chart and/or Affinity Diagram)

4 Analyse the causes

4.1 What are the possible causes of variation and poor performance? (Fishbone Diagram)

4.2 What are the root causes of variation and poor performance? (Hot Dot and Interrelationship Digraph)

4.3 What data are needed to measure performance? (Measures Selection Matrix)

4.4 What do the data say about current performance? (Check Sheets, Run Charts, Pareto Charts)

5 Develop a theory for improvement

5.1 What are the possible solutions, and which will have the greatest impact? (Potential Improvements Matrix)

5.2 What are the recommendations for action, including time lines and responsibilities? (Gantt Chart)

5.3 How will the recommendations be communicated?

On the final afternoon, teams presented their findings to the school leadership team. The other Student Teams were also present. Their findings were presented as a written report and a presentation.

The Evaluation Meeting occurred in the days following the report presentation and provided an opportunity to give feedback to the school about their experience.

The many excellent recommendations were acted upon in the weeks that followed, and have made lasting and significant improvements to the school.

In the words of Andrew Gohl, Assistant Principal:

The PDSA cycle provides a structure and a clear process that people can work through, that is inclusive of all voices: regardless of whether you are the very young, the very old, the very vociferous, the very quiet. There’s a clear process there for everyone to have a voice, for everyone to be heard. And, of course, in that inclusiveness, the outcome is one which meets everybody’s needs.

Watch the video that tells the story of the Hallett Cove R-12 School Student Teams.