Implementation Approaches

Districts are implementing standards in different ways and on different timelines.

The majority of districts — apart from rural ones — opted to phase standards implementation by grade level, content, or both.

Standards Implementation Sequence

Implementation Sequence
by Locale

Phased Implementation Approach

Phased Implementation Approach by Locale

Most districts used a mix of funding sources to support their implementation efforts.

Center Quote Icon(1)We’ve gotten some nice one-time money from the state, but the challenge with one-time money is that you can’t buy personnel with it. You can buy resources, professional development… but when you’re thinking about lowering class sizes, adding intervention… those all require human capital. You can only do so much with funding you’re going to have once.

–  District Leader

Implementation Funding Sources

Funding Sources by Locale

  • Many districts used the Common Core (one-time funding) for their initial efforts
  • Districts have subsequently improvised with additional funding
  • Several districts plan to use the Educator Effectiveness grant to supplement funding
  • While one-time efforts have provided funding relief, districts raised concern about the need for ongoing funding to support sustainability

Implementation Funding Sources

Funding Sources by Locale

  • Many districts used the Common Core (one-time funding) for their initial efforts
  • Districts have subsequently improvised with additional funding
  • Several districts plan to use the Educator Effectiveness grant to supplement funding
  • While one-time efforts have provided funding relief, districts raised concern about the need for ongoing funding to support sustainability

Districts’ implementation planning differed in start time, the activities they developed, how they sourced resources, and what tools they used.

Implementation Planning Summary

Awareness

  • During this phase districts used external technical assistance primarily for standards awareness training
  • Districts received support from county offices of education, the California Department of Education (CDE), for- and non-profit organizations and independent consultants
  • The awareness phase extended into 2013–14 school year for some districts

Transition

  • During the transition phase, districts began developing internal support capacity; started implementation planning (full or phased); determined curriculum options (buy/pilot, adapt, or create); and focused on professional development needs
  • In small districts, administrators — primarily principals — and teachers worked together to assess implementation needs whereas larger districts developed special teams, such as TOSAs (Teachers on Special Assignment), to determine curricula and implementation needs

Implementation

  • During implementation, districts switched their focus to building professional development capacity
  • Districts established professional learning communities, school site walkthroughs, and other development opportunities for both teacher and administrator professional development and collaboration
  •  With varying degrees of success, districts developed and/or sourced formative and benchmark assessments to evaluate student performance and instructional strategy