YES, Implement Concept
Conditions:
NO, Reject Concept
Conditions:
Focus
How are our students doing? (learning & experience)
How do we collectively make good decisions?
Outcomes
Generating thought
Thoughtexchange: Effective Decision Making
Consider a time when you were a part of decision that involved multiple people with varying levels of authority/responsibility. If the example was an exemplar, why? If the example wasn’t, why not?
Summary Report Thoughtexchange Effective Decision Making
Implementation Criteria | De-Implementation Criteria (DeWitt 2022) |
Impacts an unmet gap, problem, or service and aligns with district goals and priorities. | The program being de-implemented has not been shown to effective and impactful. |
Program has been shown to be effective and impactful. | The program being de-implemented is less effective or impactful than another available. |
Program has support from those potentially impacted. | The program being de-implemented causes harm. |
Program has resources to implement and sustain. | The program being de-implemented is no longer necessary. |
Generating Thought: Success Criteria
What should we consider?
Questions to Consider (DeWitt 2022) |
What are the specific goals of the program? |
How valuable or important are those goals? |
What evidence would you trust to verify those goals were met? |
Would all invested in the program trust the same evidence? |
How soon would you expect to attain the evidence? |
How much “improvement” is sufficient (cost-effectiveness)? |
Mentimeter: What are important Success Criteria for effective decision making?
Use this link to participate. You can also join using this QR code:
https://www.menti.com/al2ijg1mzhps
YES, Implement Concept
Conditions:
NO, Reject Concept
Conditions:
Resource: Program Change Considerations - FORM
Decision Type | Does the decision have potential to cause a significant impact on student experience, enrollment, facility use, staffing, or other important resources within one or more schools through implementation or de-implementation? Consider if:
If you are unsure whether a program change proposal is required, please contact your supervisor. Supervisors are responsible for including other leaders who might be connected to the program change. |
Big-Bet Decisions - high possible impact, often involving situations with unclear right or wrong choices, policy level | |
Cross-Cutting Decisions - frequent and require broad collaboration across the organization. | |
Delegated decisions - frequent, empowered staff, day-to-day |
Determining the Path
How do you know which type of decision?
Decision Type | Resources | Example | Level | Process |
Big-Bet Decisions - high possible impact, often involving situations with unclear right or wrong choices, policy level | Program Change Considerations - FORM T&L Cabinet & Cabinet Meetings Board: updates/briefings, 1x & 2x meetings, study sessions Labor Leadership, Advisories | Programs of Choice Policy | | |
Cross-Cutting Decisions - frequent and require broad collaboration across the organization. | School/Team Meetings Program Change Considerations - FORM T&L Cabinet & Cabinet Meetings Labor Leadership, Advisories | TOSA/Coach Reorganization | | |
Delegated decisions - frequent, empowered staff, day-to-day | Policy & procedures Professional learning and training PLC structure | | | |
Types of Decisions
Ranking priorities for decision-making considering student impact & community trust
Proposal: We adopt these ranking priorities for decision-making
Criteria for effective decision-making
Implementation of effective decision-making criteria
Decision Making Framework
YES, Implement Concept
Conditions:
NO, Reject Concept
Conditions:
Resource: Program Change Considerations - FORM
Phase 1: Exploration - Unpacking the decision
Decision Information
2. Equity Lens
What is the intended purpose of this policy, program, practice or decision?
STUDENT FOCUS
Which groups of students (racial, ethnic, ability, gender…) are or will be most affected by this policy, program, practice or decision? What are the likely, potential, and unintended effects on these communities?
REDUCING DISPARITY
How does this policy, program, practice or decision affect existing disparities? How will progress toward reducing existing disparities be measured and tracked?
STAKEHOLDER VOICE
What steps have been taken to involve stakeholders who are members of the communities most affected by this policy, program, practice, or decision and how has their input been considered? What other information is being used to assess the effects of the policy, program, practice, or decision on educational equity?
BARRIERS
What are the barriers (e.g., financial, programmatic, administrative) to achieve more equitable outcomes and how can these barriers be mitigated or eliminated?
3. Level
Level:
Rationale:
Phase 3: The Decision Who should make the decision and how?
Decision Making Layers
4. Structure
Structure | Basis for Decision | Applications | Limitations |
Autocratic | Personal knowledge or rules with little or no consideration of other perspectives | Everyday operational decisions where there are clear rules and no apparent conflicts or conflicts are already well known, trust is high | Quick and efficient, blindspots, spends trust |
Consultative | Personal knowledge with perspective-seeking to help people feel heard and to inform a decision | Operational or decisions in which the perspectives of stakeholders can help formulate a decision | Time consuming, but can improve decisions and build engagements |
Compromise | Leverages stakeholder perspectives to develop a decision that gives everyone something they want | Making “deals” to which all stakeholders must agree | Time consuming, but necessary in deal-making situations |
Leverages stakeholder perspectives to develop a decision that everyone can support | Decisions in which the perspectives of stakeholders are required to formulate a decision and support is needed to move forward | Can be efficient, but requires excellent facilitation skills and training for all parties |
Structured engagement for input & feedback
Additional Research/Data
Structured Engagement
Possible Participants:
Students
Staff
Families
Labor leaders
Team leaders
Principals
Advisory groups
External groups
Feedback Examples:
Meetings
Surveys
Focus Groups
Electronic
Testimonial
Student learning
Student experience
Interviews
Research
Why?
Gain multiple perspectives
Identify SWOTs
Assess resources and viability
Gather evidence of effectiveness
Determine impact
Structure:
Plan overview:
5. Communication
Phase 4: Make the Decision (loop back to Phase 2)
Decision Communication Plan (audiences, timing, format, point of contact, …)
6. AAR
Phase 5: Post Decision After Action Review
Purpose:
Guidelines:
What was supposed to happen?
What happened? Why?
What worked and didn’t work? Why?
What would you do differently next time? Why?