Home Page Transformation Guidepost Step 1 of 8 12% Self-Assessment for Organizational ImprovementStart by exploring the five cultures of practice in any order. As you move through each section, you’ll use clear rubrics and consistent proficiency levels to reflect on your current practices. This process is designed to support growth, offering insight into where you are and practical guidance on what to do next.Your Name(Required) First Last School / Organization NameYour Role , we’re so glad you’re here. This is where you’ll select the cultures that you’d like to assess before getting started. Tip: Select all five cultures to receive a complete summary overview. Which areas would you like to assess? Culture of Common Practice Culture of Inquiry Culture of Learning by Doing Culture of Communication & Partnership Culture of Data Without Blame Culture of Common PracticeThe Culture of Common Practice is a shared, mission-aligned understanding of what high-quality teaching and learning look like. It provides clear expectations and a common language that align practice across classrooms and support reflection, feedback, and growth.A Shared Model of InstructionThe degree to which the organization has a clearly written, publicly available, consistently observed, description of what effective teaching looks like, one that moves beyond personal style to serve as a common roadmap for professional growth. 1 – No shared model; teaching varies by individual 2 – Model exists but is unclear or rarely used 3 – Clear model guides teaching, coaching, and professional development 4 – Model is embedded, used daily, and evolves over time Mission and Strategy AlignmentThe extent to which teaching and learning initiatives connect coherently to the school's mission and strategic priorities rather than competing with or pulling against one another. 1 – Initiatives are disconnected from mission and school strategy 2 – Some alignment, but efforts compete or drift 3 – Work aligns to a clear model and mission 4 – All efforts are intentionally aligned and regularly reviewed Common Language and ArtifactsThe presence of shared terminology, published exemplars, and curated portfolios that make professional expectations visible, consistent, and accessible. 1 – No shared language; practices remain relatively private 2 – Some shared terms and examples, inconsistently used 3 – Shared language and tools are used regularly 4 – Language and examples are embedded and widely shared Collaborative Routines and Meeting TimeThe degree to which protected, protocol-driven collaboration time exists for teams to engage in lesson planning, student work samples, assessment design, and inquiry cycles informed by the school's common model of practice. 1 – Little collaboration; meetings focus on logistics 2 – Regular meetings, but lack structure or purpose 3 – Protected time with clear, purposeful collaboration 4 – Teams continuously improve and influence practice school-wide Assessment and Grading CoherenceThe consistency with which grading policies, assessment practices, and standards of quality are agreed upon, published, and implemented across courses. 1 – Practices vary widely by teacher 2 – Some guidelines exist, but inconsistently applied 3 – Clear, shared practices used consistently 4 – Practices are refined through ongoing review of student work Student Experience CoherenceThe extent to which students encounter a consistent, describable learning experience from class to class, helping them articulate how learning works at their school and even contribute to shaping it. 1 – Experience varies widely across classes 2 – Some consistency within teams or grades 3 – Students understand how learning works across classes 4 – Students help shape and improve the learning experience This field is hidden when viewing the formCommon Practice Total ScoreThis field is hidden when viewing the formCommon Practice Average Score Culture of InquiryA Culture of Inquiry is a psychologically safe, non-evaluative environment where leaders and peers regularly observe classrooms to understand student learning and instructional practice. Grounded in curiosity, it focuses on gathering insights, identifying patterns, and informing next steps for growth.Anchored to a Common Model and School StrategyThe degree to which observational practices like Learning Walks are guided by specific, observable look-fors drawn from the school's shared model of instruction and strategic priorities. 1 – No shared model; observations reflect personal preference 2 – Model exists but is not clearly connected to observations 3 – Clear model with defined “look-fors” guides observations 4 – Look-fors align to model and strategy; staff use shared tools and language Psychological Safety for ObservationThe extent to which staff feel that classroom visits are driven by curiosity and collective learning rather than judgment or evaluation, enabling an open, trust-based culture of observation. 1 – Visits feel evaluative or disruptive 2 – Non-evaluative intent stated, but trust is inconsistent 3 – Clear norms; most staff feel safe being observed 4 – Safety is actively monitored and strengthened through feedback Protocols, Norms, and Feedback LoopsThe presence and consistency of shared routines for conducting visits, recording evidence-only notes, debriefing observations, and delivering timely feedback clearly connected to goals and strategy. 1 – No shared protocols; little follow-through 2 – Inconsistent protocols and loosely connected feedback 3 – Clear protocols with timely, goal-aligned feedback 4 – Strong systems use data to guide feedback, growth, and decisions Frequency, Breadth, and Equitable AccessHow often Learning Walks and classroom visits occur, who participates, and whether the organization actively ensures that access and representation are fair. 1 – Visits are rare and led only by administrators 2 – Occasional visits; limited teacher participation 3 – Regular cycles with broad staff participation 4 – Protected time ensures consistent, equitable participation Data Quality and CollectionThe rigor with which observational evidence is gathered, moving from anecdotal and judgment-laden notes toward clean, tagged, evidence-only data sets connected to the school's common model. 1 – Notes are anecdotal and often judgment-based 2 – Some structure, but evidence and judgment are mixed 3 – Clear, evidence-based data tied to model and strategy 4 – Data is analyzed and used to drive PD, strategy, and support Student Learning FocusThe degree to which observations center on what students are actually doing, saying, and thinking, examining the instructional task and student voice, as opposed to teacher behavior. 1 – Focus is mostly on teacher actions 2 – Some attention to student experience but remains inconsistent 3 – Observations focus on student thinking and learning 4 – Student voice and work consistently drive observations This field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Inquiry Total ScoreThis field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Inquiry Average Score Culture of (Learning by) DoingA Culture of (Learning by) Doing is a professional learning culture where growth happens through real, collaborative work. Educators build skill and expertise by engaging in practices like Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and Instructional Rounds, learning alongside colleagues through application, reflection, and iteration.Learning by Doing OrientationThe extent to which the organization's professional learning investment prioritizes authentic, on-the-job experiences and collaborative work, reflecting the research that most skill development happens through doing. 1 – Learning is mostly workshops or meetings; little real-time practice 2 – Some job-embedded learning, but inconsistent 3 – Regular, protected time for learning through real work together 4 – Learning is driven by doing; novices learn alongside experts consistently Psychological Safety and EmpowermentThe degree to which teachers feel safe working publicly alongside peers, owning problem selection, and making autonomous decisions about their professional practice. 1 – Peer learning feels risky; decisions are top-down 2 – Norms exist, but trust and follow-through are inconsistent 3 – Clear norms; teams have ownership within guardrails 4 – Strong trust; teams are empowered to iterate and drive improvement Instructional Rounds Quality (Instructional Core)The fidelity and depth with which peer-driven Instructional Rounds follow a clear four-step protocol: identifying a problem of practice, observing the instructional core, debriefing with evidence, and defining next-level work. 1 – Not in place or confused with evaluation 2 – Inconsistent practice, often led by administrators 3 – Clear protocols with shared understanding and purpose 4 – Used as a driver for innovation and improving practice PLC Effectiveness (Assessment Core)The regularity and rigor with which professional learning communities meet to conduct validity, reliability, and learner clarity studies using shared student work and common assessments. 1 – PLCs are inconsistent or focused on logistics 2 – Irregular meetings with uneven participation 3 – Regular PLCs with clear protocols and focus on student learning 4 – Strong, data-driven PLC cycles that shape instruction and assessment Data Collection and Portfolio IntegrationThe consistency with which evidence from collaborative learning experiences is documented, curated into portfolios, and aligned to both individual goals and the school's common model and strategy. 1 – Little to no documentation or evidence collected 2 – Some tools exist, but use is inconsistent 3 – Clear, aligned data collection supports goals and portfolios 4 – Data is visible, tracked over time, and drives decisions This field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Learning by Doing Total ScoreThis field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Learning by Doing Average Score Culture of Communication and PartnershipThe Culture of Communication and Partnership is a collaborative, goal-centered approach to supervision where teachers and leaders co-create personalized goals aligned to shared practices. Through ongoing conversations and reflection on evidence, it supports continuous growth and strong professional relationships.Partnership Stance and SafetyThe degree to which the supervisor-teacher relationship feels collaborative and growth-oriented with evaluation and professional development treated as separate tracks. 1 – Meetings feel evaluative; trust is low 2 – Non-evaluative intent stated, but trust is inconsistent 3 – Clear separation of evaluation and PD; trust is steady 4 – High trust; coaching is shared and staff feel safe to speak openly Goal Setting (Agency and Quality)The extent to which teachers have a meaningful voice in selecting a focused set of well-defined goals that are aligned to the school's common practices. 1 – Goals are unclear, assigned, or unfocused 2 – Teachers set goals, but quality and focus vary 3 – Two to three clear, aligned, evidence-based goals 4 – Goals are data-informed, aligned, and connected across teams One-on-One Cadence and QualityHow frequently and intentionally one-on-one meetings between teachers and supervisors occur throughout the year, with tight agendas driven by goals, evidence, and the school's model of common practice. 1 – Meetings are rare and lack focus 2 – Inconsistent meetings with loose connection to goals 3 – Regular, focused meetings tied to goals and evidence 4 – Ongoing coaching rhythm with visible progress and growth Evidence Ecosystem for Growth and CoachingThe breadth and variety of evidence (portfolios, observations, student work, PLC outputs, Instructional Rounds insights) that informs supervisory conversations, moving well beyond a single classroom observation. 1 – Conversations rely on limited observation 2 – Some evidence used, but still limited 3 – Multiple sources of evidence inform conversations 4 – Strong portfolios show growth over time and guide coaching Alignment with Model of Common PracticeThe degree to which goal selection, portfolio evidence, and the focus of one-on-one meetings explicitly map to the school's shared model of professional practice and strategic priorities. 1 – Goals and meetings are disconnected from the model 2 – Some alignment to model and priorities 3 – Goals and evidence clearly aligned to the model 4 – Data shows individual and team growth aligned to the model This field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Communication and Partnership Total ScoreThis field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Communication and Partnership Average Score Culture of Data without BlameA Culture of Data without Blame is a shared approach to using data that focuses on learning, not judgment. Leadership teams examine system-level data, guided by clear questions, to identify trends, inform decisions, and shape professional learning and resource allocation.Decision-Driven AnalyticsThe extent to which the organization identifies strategic decisions and formulates precise questions before collecting data, rather than mining existing data sets for post-hoc insights. 1 – Data is collected without clear questions or decisions 2 – Questions emerge after data is collected 3 – Clear questions and decisions guide data collection 4 – Decision-driven data use follows a clear cycle of identifying decisions to be made to formulating the right open question, leading to strategic data collection Blame-Free Norms and SafetyThe presence of clearly established norms and protocols that ensure data is used to understand system-level patterns and inform support, not to single out individuals. 1 – Data is used to judge or blame individuals 2 – No-blame intent stated, but inconsistently practiced 3 – Clear norms support honest, blame-free analysis that may remain anonymized 4 – Strong trust through diverse perspectives where data may be openly shared and examined Systems-Level FocusThe degree to which data analysis centers on program, division, or whole-school performance (rather than individual scorecards) to inform collective strategy and resource allocation. 1 – Focus is on individual performance 2 – Mix of individual and team focus 3 – Focus is primarily on teams or systems 4 – Systems-level data drives decisions and improvement Alignment to Common Practice and StrategyThe extent to which data collection is explicitly tagged to the school's look-fors, common model of practice, and strategic priorities. 1 – Data is disconnected from priorities or model 2 – Some alignment to strategy and practices 3 – Data clearly aligns to model and strategic priorities 4 – Data is tracked over time to guide and adjust strategy From Sense-Making to ActionThe rigor and cadence with which leadership teams move from reviewing data dashboards through structured interpretation to logged decisions with clear rationale and follow-up checks. 1 – Data is discussed, but little action follows 2 – Inconsistent review and limited action 3 – Regular review leads to informed decisions 4 – Decisions are tracked, evaluated, and refined over time Team Diversity and VoiceThe degree to which data interpretation and strategic decision-making involve a diverse cross-section of roles, disciplines, and identities, ensuring that no single perspective dominates. 1 – A few voices dominate interpretation 2 – Some broader input, but inconsistent 3 – Diverse perspectives are regularly included 4 – Diverse, rotating voices strengthen decisions and insight This field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Data without Blame Total ScoreThis field is hidden when viewing the formCulture of Data without Blame Average Score Thanks for taking the time to self-assess, . Submit your email to receive your results. Email Address(Required)
