1. MATH IN COMMON COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE EVALUATION Produced for California Education Partners With funding from The S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation By Dan Bugler

2. DESIGN OF THE COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE Education Partners:  Leadership Convenings  Peer-Led Learning Sessions  Site Visits  Innovation Labs  Summer Summits  Online Forums WestEd  Establish Metrics and Milestones  Evaluation Cycle Reports  Conduct Formative Inquiry  Provide Reference Desk Services  CoP Developmental Evaluator  Disseminate Information

3. DESIRED OUTCOMES Participant engagement and satisfaction Increased connections between districts Exchanged practice between districts Effective and on-going district-to-district collaboration Increased capacity of individual participants and capacity of organization Sustainable district improvement Increased student success Increased capacity

4. GUIDING QUESTIONS:  Do district participants find the Community of Practice to be useful and relevant as they implement CCSS-M?  What aspects of the CoP provide the greatest value to districts?  What needs to change to increase the relevance and utility of the CoP for districts?

5. GENERAL REFLECTIONS  “That was one of my first thoughts when I saw the districts involved. You know, you look at Dinuba with nine schools and then the big urban districts...just the range. I thought how is this going to work?”

6. DISTRICTS VALUE THE WORK, AND THE TRUST WITH EACH OTHER “ It’s changed the way we think and what we do. As we encounter similar problems, we’re able to put all of our collective heads together to drum up solutions.” “You’ve got other districts that are helping you with what the problem is that you’re trying to solve in your district.”

7. THE COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE IS FOSTERING COLLABORATION  “We’ve drawn from Oakland, from San Francisco, from Garden Grove, with how they’ve done technology, how they’ve arranged their scope and sequences, with the curriculum and some of the performance tasks that they use. So certainly this is an evolving process and we’re building upon each other’s experiences.”

8. DISTRICTS ARE SEEING BROAD EFFECTS OF THIS WORK “What is so valuable is some of the conversations that we have internally…we’re making structural decisions about implementation…and it’s vertically aligned – that is powerful.“ “…I’m always looking at how I can apply those same instruments, techniques, and strategies, to English language arts…to science or history…”

9. DISTRICTS VALUE EDUCATION PARTNERS WILLINGNESS TO LISTEN AND CHANGE “Well, they’re the energy in the room...we appreciate it.” “They go out of their way to ask for feedback ALL the time.” “A number of people felt like they were overly facilitated early on and that they found a better balance on that more recently.“

10. “THE ACCOUNTABILITY IS HUGE; THERE IS FLEXIBILITY, BUT THERE ARE DEADLINES TO MEET. “YOU’VE SAID YOU MADE A GOAL, NOW WHAT PROGRESS HAVE YOU MADE? AND WHAT’S THE EVIDENCE?…” Districts Value the Accountability, and the Team Time

11. DISTRICTS VALUE WESTED’S ROLE BUT WANT A CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF THAT ROLE “[Our WestEd staff is] somebody that we all feel that we can sit with and have a truly engaging partnership... a partner in our work.” “When you say let me know what I can do, if we don’t know the capacity of the person…we don’t know what to ask.”

12. CHALLENGES FOR THE COMMUNITY 1. What Could be Done Better in the CoP? 2. Are their shared problems of practice the Community could work on together? 3. How can we increase the usefulness and impact of research for work in your district? 4. How can the CoP better support the D&I work?

13. “ ” THESE QUESTIONS ARE GOOD ENOUGH AND IMPORTANT ENOUGH THAT REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE DISTRICTS SHOULD BE TALKING TO EACH OTHER, NOT TO YOU. It is your Community of Practice, how do we improve it?