Author: Sehrish Anjum

By Krystal Lomanto, San Benito County Superintendent of Schools

As a County Superintendent, I have learned that when districts face significant challenges, improvement happens most effectively when support is clear, coordinated, and focused on building capacity rather than assigning blame. At the heart of this work are students. Every decision we make about support, intervention, and accountability ultimately affects their opportunities, experiences, and outcomes.

Over the years, I have seen districts make progress when they receive the right support at the right time. I have also seen how uncertainty about roles, responsibilities, and decision-making can create confusion and delay action when urgency is needed most. When students are struggling academically, experiencing chronic absenteeism, or not receiving the services they need, we cannot afford a system that lacks clarity.

A System Built on Shared Responsibility

California’s Statewide System of Support was built on the principle of shared responsibility. County Offices of Education, Geographic Leads, the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence, the California Department of Education, and local districts all have important roles to play. For the system to function as intended, everyone must understand how decisions are made, when support should be intensified, and who is responsible for delivering that support.

Strengthening Support Before Challenges Escalate

Recent statewide investments in universal and targeted assistance have strengthened our ability to support districts earlier and more effectively. Counties now have additional opportunities to work alongside districts, using Dashboard data, local indicators, LCAP implementation, and whole-child strategies to identify challenges before they become a crisis.

Early support matters because the longer problems persist, the greater impact on students. Every year a student spends in an underperforming system is a year of opportunity that cannot be regained. This helps counties identify needs before challenges intensify and ensure escalation decisions are based on a clear record of support, engagement, and impact.

Flexibility with Accountability

In my experience, districts do not always enter improvement efforts through the same door. Some readily embrace additional support, while others engage more effectively through an existing planning process, peer network, or trusted regional partner. A strong county support structure can create multiple entry points for collaboration while still maintaining clear expectations for evidence, progress, and results.

Flexibility in approach should not mean ambiguity in accountability.

Clear Expectations and Transparent Decisions

To better serve students, California should establish clear statewide criteria for escalation, continuation, de-escalation, and reassignment of support responsibilities. This would help ensure consistency across California. Decisions that affect district governance or intervention levels should be grounded in documented evidence, including implementation progress, improvement planning efforts, support quality reviews, and the results of systemic reviews.

When expectations are clear and transparent, everyone can focus on the work of improvement rather than debating the process

Building Trust Through Transparency

Transparency is equally important for maintaining trust. District leaders should have clear avenues to raise concerns about support quality, decision-making processes, or the application of escalation criteria. That trust is critical because meaningful improvement requires strong partnerships among districts, counties, state agencies, families, and communities.

Formal review, complaint, and appeal processes can help ensure that decisions are not only fair, but also perceived as fair by the communities they affect.

Continuous Improvement for the System

At the same time, the system itself must be designed to learn and improve. Feedback from districts, County Offices of Education, and support providers can offer valuable insight into what is working, where barriers exist, and how assistance can be strengthened over time. Continuous improvement should apply not only to districts, but also to the support system itself.

Defining Success

For me, success is when district leaders understand who is responsible for providing support, when County Offices and state partners have clarity about their roles, and when districts can quickly access the expertise, resources, and coordination they need.

Most importantly, success will be reflected in a system where escalation decisions are viewed as transparent, evidence-based, and centered on improving outcomes for students, not as punitive actions or compliance exercises.

Looking Ahead

California’s Statewide System of Support was built on shared responsibility. Stronger county-led universal and targeted supports can help identify needs earlier, coordinate expertise more effectively, and provide a clearer continuum of assistance before more intensive intervention becomes necessary.

If we remain focused on transparency, collaboration, and continuous improvement, we can build a system that not only supports districts, but ultimately delivers better outcomes for students who depend on us every day.

CCEE Communications
In partnership with Morongo Unified School District and Open Access.

When Morongo Unified School District joined the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence’s (CCEE) Universal Design for Learning (UDL) Network, district leaders were looking for more than professional development, they were looking for a community of educators tackling similar challenges.

As a small rural district, Morongo faced many of the same barriers experienced by districts across California. They wanted to learn from others, share ideas, and build a sustainable approach to implementing Universal Design for Learning that would benefit every student.

“Our team wanted to connect with other districts that were implementing UDL,” said Eric Smith, Program Specialist. “We wanted to learn from their successes and struggles. Although we are a small rural district, we have many of the same barriers that other districts have.”

Building Capacity Through Partnership

The UDL Network is facilitated by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE) in partnership with the California Coalition for Inclusive Learning (CCIL), Supporting Inclusive Practices (SIP), and Open Access. Together, these organizations demonstrate the success of the Statewide System of Support (SSOS), by bringing complementary expertise to help districts strengthen inclusive instructional practices through coaching, collaboration, and continuous improvement.

For Morongo Unified, one of the most important shifts came from reframing UDL as an instructional framework for all learners rather than a special education initiative.

“One of the most valuable aspects of participating in the network was the support in shifting UDL from a SELPA-led initiative to one led through Instructional Services,” Eric shared. “We have been intentional about recognizing that UDL is designed to support all students, not just students receiving special education services.”

According to Leah Padilla of Open Access, that shift represented an important milestone in Morongo’s implementation journey.

“The district’s instructional leadership is clearly communicating that UDL is a framework for designing instruction that benefits every learner,” she explained. “Instructional Services and SELPA are now sharing the work and strengthening Tier 1 instruction together.”

From One-Time Training to Continuous Learning

Rather than relying on isolated professional development sessions, Morongo adopted a continuous improvement approach to implementation.

When Open Access began supporting the district in early 2024, district leaders already understood that meaningful implementation would require more than a one- or two-day workshop. After joining the CCEE UDL Network later that year, Twentynine Palms Junior High formalized a plan for monthly professional learning focused on UDL implementation.

These recurring learning opportunities allowed educators to focus on one strategy at a time, apply it in their classrooms, reflect on their practice, and receive coaching before moving to the next step.

“Instead of feeling overwhelmed by trying to implement everything at once,” Leah noted, “educators were able to experiment, learn from one another, and gradually build both confidence and capacity in implementing UDL.”

Today, UDL has become part of Morongo Unified’s districtwide communication and instructional improvement efforts. Schools continue to receive ongoing training and coaching as implementation expands across the district.

Seeing the Difference

For Eric, the most meaningful evidence of progress doesn’t come from a spreadsheet, it comes from students.

He recalls hearing from students who transferred to other schools and spoke about what they missed most: the opportunities to collaborate with classmates and the flexibility to demonstrate their learning using tools and materials that helped them succeed.

The district has also found that implementing UDL through ongoing coaching and monthly learning sessions has resulted in greater adoption than traditional one-time trainings.

“UDL is simply too broad to deliver in a one- or two-day training,” Eric explained. “We found more teachers implemented at least one UDL principle when we provided one hour of learning or coaching each month. It also gave teachers opportunities to ask for guidance as they tried new approaches to lesson planning.”

Looking Ahead

Morongo Unified’s journey demonstrates that lasting instructional change is built over time through collaboration, coaching, and continuous improvement.

By participating in the UDL Network, the district has strengthened its instructional systems while contributing to a statewide community of educators committed to expanding access and opportunity for every learner.

As districts across California continue to implement Universal Design for Learning, Morongo’s experience offers a simple but powerful reminder: meaningful change doesn’t happen through a single training, it happens through sustained partnership, shared learning, and a commitment to continuous improvement.

By Kristin Brooks, Ed.D.

Across California, Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) are increasingly recognizing that supporting student success requires more than what schools alone can provide. An ecosystem of care (ESOC) represents a collaborative, cross-agency approach designed to improve outcomes for children and families by aligning education, health, and community resources. This work reflects a shared commitment among educators, county agencies, and community partners to address the broader conditions that influence student success. By centering prevention, coordination, and collective impact, an ESOC offers a promising pathway for supporting the whole child in a coordinated effort and alleviating what may be overwhelming for families trying to navigate complicated systems one by one.

Understanding an Ecosystem of Care: A Whole-Child Approach

Who:

Cross-sector partners including LEAs, county agencies, community-based organizations, and family-serving systems.

What:
While rooted in mental health system frameworks, ESOCs have evolved to encompass a broader focus on prevention and early intervention—supporting all children, not just those already engaged in specialized systems.

Why it matters:
Research highlights the measurable benefits of implementing an ecosystem of care approach. Communities engaged in ESOC efforts have seen:

• A 10% increase in school attendance
• A 32% reduction in school expulsions
• A 42% decrease in inpatient hospital admissions
• A 38% reduction in costs associated with juvenile arrests

When agencies work together, they can address root causes of inequities and create more sustainable systems. ESOCs help LEAs move beyond siloed efforts, increasing their capacity to meet the academic, social, and emotional needs of students. This alignment strengthens outcomes tied to attendance, engagement, and overall well-being. These results demonstrate that when agencies align resources and strategies, they not only improve student outcomes but also reduce strain on broader public systems. For LEAs, this translates into stronger learning environments and more equitable access to support.

From Vision to Action: The ESOC Toolkit

Who:
Developed with input from over 30 ESOC workgroup members across California, including participants in AB 2083 initiatives, county, community, and state agency partners.

What:
To support agencies in building and sustaining coherence in the system, the ESOC Toolkit provides an interactive, structured, step-by-step approach. It is designed to help ESOCs establish effective workgroups, define shared goals, and identify the specific actions that ESOC members will take to actualize those goals.

Step 1 focuses on creating the conditions that are necessary to build trust between partners and incentivize change.
Step 2 defines steps and provides tools for building ESOC workgroups.
Step 3 helps ESOCs identify shared goals by evaluating existing data and conducting a needs assessment.
Step 4 offers tools for identifying and measuring concrete, attainable goals.

Step 5 outlines steps to ensure that each agency owns the responsibility for taking specific actions toward the ESOC’s shared goals.

Every step in the toolkit includes templates, examples, and additional information that ESOCs can use to help organize, understand, and implement recommendations. The resources are found in “Resource Boxes.” Each step also includes “Tip Boxes” with background context, helpful suggestions, or shared wisdom from interviews with ESOC workgroup members. Finally, several of the steps in the toolkit include “Tool Boxes” that link to tools ESOC teams can use to guide them through the processes and activities described in each step. The tools can be downloaded as an interactive Google document and shared, allowing for real-time collaboration between ESOC members.

Why it matters:

The toolkit provides a clear roadmap for LEAs and partners to move from intention to implementation. By offering actionable steps and shared tools, it helps teams build sustainable systems that can evolve based on data and community needs.

An ecosystem of care exemplifies the power of collective action in advancing the whole-child vision in California. By fostering collaboration across agencies and centering prevention, ESOCs help LEAs create more equitable, responsive systems that support student success. As this work continues to grow, we invite you to explore the toolkit, connect with partners, and share your own stories of cross-agency collaboration to strengthen outcomes for children and families.

By Nicole Anderson
In collaboration with Dr. Marcie Poole

As we continue our conversations about unpacking the system of public education and reimagining student success, I find myself reflecting deeply on my own journey as an educator and on what it truly takes to create meaningful systems change.

For many of us, we have existed within a system without always being aware of the conditions shaping it. There was a time when I didn’t fully recognize how policies, practices, and the ways we allocate resources did not benefit all students. Even more difficult to admit, I was at times, unintentionally perpetuating inequities within a system designed in ways that did not serve the very students I cared most about.

My growing awareness connects closely to a story shared in The Waters of Systems Change:

A fish swims by another fish and asks, “How’s the water?” The second fish responds, “What’s water?”

This analogy resonates deeply. As educators, many of us have spent our entire lives in this system as students, then professionals, without ever being taught to see it clearly. Seeing the system clearly is where transformation begins.

Seeing the System for the First Time

I grew up in the education system from early childhood through higher education and later returned as a teacher, a principal, and an educational leader across California. It wasn’t until I was serving as an assistant principal, reviewing a historical timeline of public education shared by the National Equity Project, that I experienced a profound shift in my thinking.

I began to understand that the U.S. public education system, rooted in the early 1600s, was never designed for the diverse students we serve today.

At the same time, I hold deep gratitude. Because of policy shifts, advocacy, and the sacrifices of those who came before me, I understand that I have benefited from increased access and opportunity. I stand on the shoulders of those who fought for progress.

Yet one truth continues to surface in this work: policy can change faster than belief systems.

Research and improvement efforts across California’s Statewide System of Support continue to reinforce the reality that sustainable improvement requires more than compliance or technical fixes. Real transformation requires shifts in mindset, stronger relationships, clearer roles, collaborative coherence, and the internal capacity of systems to continuously improve.

When Technical Fixes Aren’t Enough

One of the most important lessons I’ve learned is that educational improvement is not simply a technical challenge, it is an adaptive one.

We can implement new initiatives, adopt new policies, and create strategic plans, but if underlying beliefs about students remain unchanged, outcomes often remain unchanged too.

Educators have been conditioned by systems built on inequitable assumptions about intelligence, behavior, culture, language, and potential. Unlearning those assumptions requires ongoing reflection and courage. A powerful example of this for me came through discipline practices. As an administrator, I believed I was upholding structures that ensured safety and accountability. Yet over time, I realized many of these policies were not designed to meet the needs of all students. I also came to understand that I had more discretion than I initially recognized and more opportunities to respond in ways that supported growth rather than simply enforced compliance.

There was a moment of reckoning when I recognized that suspending students and coordinating with probation officers or law enforcement could contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline. That realization stayed with me. And when I looked back, I could see there were other pathways available – approaches rooted in relationship, restoration, belonging, and understanding that could have supported students while still maintaining high expectations.

The Power of Relationships and Systemic Support

What I have learned over time aligns with what improvement research continues to show across California: meaningful change happens when systems prioritize relationships, coherence, and collective responsibility for students.

Districts and schools that improve outcomes do not rely solely on isolated programs or individual heroics. They build systems where:

• relationships matter,
• collaboration is intentional,
• data is used with an equity lens,
• supports are coordinated,
• and adults share responsibility for student success.

Research from California’s improvement efforts highlights that lasting change occurs when systems build internal efficacy, not simply when they add more meetings, mandates, or disconnected initiatives.
That distinction matters deeply. Because too often in education, we mistake activity for transformation.

Holding the Line Between Love and Accountability

Throughout my career, I encountered many students in moments of struggle, students who sat in my office because they didn’t meet expectations or follow school rules. And yet, one thing I know to be true: I never gave up on them. I may have been firm. I may have been direct. But I always tried to balance that with love, belief, and an unwavering expectation that they would succeed.

Today, I run into those same students now business owners, parents, coaches, and leaders in their communities. They are thriving.

And it makes me wonder: Did our system truly measure their brilliance when they were sitting in our classrooms?

Rethinking How We Define Success

The metrics we often use in schools don’t always capture the full picture of a student’s potential or future success.

Reimagining student success requires us to think beyond test scores and compliance. It requires us to:

• Build meaningful relationships
• Connect learning to students’ lived experiences
• Honor culture and identity
• Maintain rigorous expectations while meeting students where they are

Rigor is not about rigidity. True rigor means refusing to let students fail while supporting them every step of the way toward their goals. And system transformation requires more than isolated interventions. It requires coherence across leadership, instruction, support systems, and adult learning.

Starting Beneath the Surface

The Waters of Systems Change framework reminds us that transformation begins beneath the surface with our mental models, beliefs, and assumptions. If we want to interrupt inequitable systems, we must first become aware of the water we are swimming in.

That awareness allows us to move:

• from unconscious participation to intentional action,
• from fragmented efforts to coherent systems,
• and from compliance-driven improvement to equity-centered transformation.

This work is not about blame. It is about awareness, responsibility, and collective growth.

A Call to Do Better

As Maya Angelou so powerfully said:

“Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.”

This is the work before us:

• To know better.
• To reflect honestly.
• To strengthen our systems, not just our programs.
• To build coherence instead of fragmentation.
• To center relationships alongside results.
• And to reimagine a system that truly supports the success of all students, not just some.

Reflection Questions:
What inequities within our system have we normalized without questioning, and how are they showing up in our outcomes?
How do our beliefs about students, especially those who struggle show up in our daily decisions and actions?
In what ways might our current policies and discipline practices be contributing to exclusion rather than student growth?
Who is not being fully seen or valued by our current definition of student success, and how do we know?
What is one system, practice, or belief we are willing to actively change right now to better serve all students?
How do we ensure every student experiences both deep care and consistently high expectations in our system?

Resources

Water of Systems Change article

Water of Systems Change action plan

History of Public Education Timeline

History of public school funding in California

History of English Learners

By Sehrish Anjum

At the recent Community Engagement Initiative (CEI) PLLN, one message grounded the learning from start to finish: Engagement is not the goal, it is the strategy. Delivered during the keynote by Dr. Karen Mapp of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, this idea challenged participants to rethink how schools approach engagement. Not as a separate initiative, but as a core strategy for improving outcomes for students, families, and communities.

Throughout the convening, that message came to life through the voices, experiences, and leadership of students and families.

The two-day convening brought together educational partners from across California to strengthen community engagement practices, reflect on progress, and learn from one another through student leadership sessions, peer learning opportunities, and collaborative activities.

From Involvement to Partnership

During her keynote, Dr. Mapp emphasized the distinction between involvement and authentic engagement.

Meaningful engagement, she explained, is rooted in partnership. It prioritizes two-way communication, values the experiences and expertise of families and students, and creates relationships that are collaborative rather than transactional. This shift from simply involving educational partners to truly partnering with them was reflected throughout the convening.

Participants explored how strong relationships, shared leadership, and mutual trust create the conditions for meaningful and lasting change.

Students Leading Through Positive Social Norms Campaigns

One powerful example of student leadership emerged during presentations of Positive Social Norms campaigns. Students courageously shared campaigns they developed to address real challenges and experiences within their school communities. Through thoughtful messaging and peer-centered strategies, students demonstrated not only creativity and leadership, but also a strong commitment to fostering more positive and inclusive school environments.

Their presentations highlighted the importance of creating intentional opportunities for students to lead, contribute, and shape school culture.

More importantly, students spoke with honesty and confidence about the realities they see every day, modeling what authentic student voice can look like when schools create space for it.

Practicing Courage Through the CEI 2.0 Metrics Activity

Another impactful moment came during a separate CEI 2.0 Metrics activity, where students and families engaged directly with district and site staff in reflection and dialogue around engagement practices and systems.

participants explored what meaningful engagement looks like across areas such as:

• strong relationships and authentic partnerships,
• shared beliefs and collective efficacy,
• shared power and decision-making,
• alignment of systems and resources, and
• centering the experiences of educational partners

What stood out most during this activity was the courage students and families demonstrated in the space.

They:

• Asked clarifying questions,
• Pushed for deeper understanding,
• Offered direct and honest feedback to district and site staff,
• Named strengths while also identifying areas for growth.

These conversations reflected what authentic engagement requires: trust, vulnerability, and a willingness to listen and learn together.

Rather than positioning students and families as passive participants, the activity created space for them to actively shape the conversation and provide feedback grounded in lived experience.

In many ways, this moment embodied one of the convening’s central themes: meaningful engagement happens when educational partners are not only invited into the room, but are trusted as collaborators in improvement efforts.

Building the Conditions for Belonging

Dr. Mapp’s keynote reinforced that authentic partnership begins with beliefs.

She shared several foundational ideas that drive meaningful family and community engagement, including:

• All families want the best for their children,
• All families have the capacity to support learning,
• Families and school staff should function as equal partners.

These beliefs were visible throughout the convening, not only in formal sessions, but in the relationships and conversations taking place across teams and cohorts.

Participants worked collaboratively to reflect on current practices, exchange ideas, and consider how systems can become more relational, responsive, and inclusive.

The convening also reinforced that engagement is not an “extra” initiative competing for attention. Instead, engagement serves as a foundational strategy for improving attendance, achievement, belonging, and overall student success.

A Reminder of What Is Possible

Perhaps the most powerful takeaway from the convening was the reminder that meaningful change happens when students, families, educators, and communities work together.

Whether through student-led campaigns, courageous conversations during the 2.0 Metrics activity, or reflections sparked by the keynote, participants experienced what authentic partnership can look and feel like in practice.

As one message from the keynote powerfully stated: “You’re actually changing someone’s life.”

That change begins when schools move beyond engagement as an activity and embrace it as a strategy for transformation. And as this convening demonstrated, when we partner— everyone wins.

As the CEI community continues to grow, educators, students, families, and community partners interested in future cohort opportunities can stay connected by signing up for notifications through the CEI website. CEI also offers a series of in-depth learning modules on meaningful pupil, family, and community engagement to support continued professional learning and deeper expertise in engagement practices.

By Jessica Gunderson and Katie Brackenridge

California’s new Attendance Recovery policy gives districts the opportunity to recoup lost attendance dollars in non-school hours. Given the negative impact of persistently high absentee rates in districts, the policy is sparking a lot of interest across the state.

Beyond money, Attendance Recovery is an opportunity to increase student learning time and engagement – a much bigger win in the long run. The key to success is partnering with your district’s existing afterschool infrastructure to leverage the relationships, infrastructure and environments that research shows have a positive lasting impact on student attendance. Afterschool and summer programs already provide more than 120 additional learning days per year. Attendance Recovery can enhance this time.

What is Attendance Recovery (AR)? Here are some of the basic guidelines:

• AR provides students in TK/K-12 more opportunities to learn during non-school hours.
• It allows school districts to recoup ADA funding lost due to absences.
• It is voluntary for districts and non-compulsory/non-punitive for students.
• It must be led by a certificated teacher and applies only to in-person instruction. 
• It requires activities and content to be “aligned to grade level standards that are substantially equivalent to the pupils’ regular instructional program” as defined by the school district.

Attendance Recovery is a complicated and nuanced policy that is raising a lot of questions for districts. To support the field, the Partnership for Children & Youth (PCY) conducted focus groups and interviews with LEAs that are early-adopters of the policy. Based on their experience, they had some practical strategies and suggestions for their peers that are captured in a memo Emerging Practices for Attendance Recovery, and in a webinar featuring some of the districts profiled in the memo.

As a preview, here are some key ideas from our pioneering districts:

What should happen first?

• Find out what’s already happening in your expanded learning program that might be a good starting place for Attendance Recovery. For example, many LEAs already have certificated teachers teaching clubs after school. How could these clubs be re-imagined to meet AR requirements and still be fun for both students and teachers? 

How can we meet AR requirements, while making it engaging?

• Define how content is “aligned to grade level standards that are substantially equivalent to the pupils’ regular instructional program” per Ed Code.. Some LEAs are creating simple systems that allow teachers to design activities and choose content standards that are exciting for them to teach and spark students’ interest in learning. How can you tap into teachers’ passions to offer activities that align with grade-level standards? 

How does AR fit with other expanded learning programs?

• Use the expanded learning infrastructure to organize and manage your Attendance Recovery classes, including, for example, the registration process, snacks, parent communication, parent pick up procedures, etc. How can you leverage this well-developed infrastructure to implement Attendance Recovery efficiently and in ways that are already familiar to families enrolled in expanded learning?

How can we encourage teachers to do AR?  

• Partner with the teachers’ union to set ELO-P/AR rates for teachers. In many schools, teachers report that they love building relationships with their students in non-school hours and sharing topics and skills that they are passionate about. How can you leverage the relationship with your teachers’ union to incentivize teachers’ participation in AR?

These are just a few of the practical ideas and strategies that LEAs shared in our Attendance Recovery memo and webinar. Take a look for more detailed guidance.

While Attendance Recovery offers an opportunity, it could also lead to negative, unintended consequences. Implemented poorly – for example, with repetitive worksheets and dispassionate teachers – Attendance Recovery could become another reason young people don’t want to come to school and don’t care about learning. Innovative districts, like the ones we interviewed, are going for real impact by building on their existing expanded learning assets to inspire student learning and engagement in the long run.

For details on Ed Code and CDE guidelines, here’s the link to CDE’s Frequently Asked Questions.

By Tricia Protzman and Amy Tarantino Jones, Ed.D

When districts across Madera County began turning to Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) as a strategy for improvement, they did so from distinct contexts and with clear intentions for growth. Yosemite Unified School District engaged through technical assistance and selected PLCs to strengthen outcomes. Madera Unified School District pursued the Intensive Assistance Model (IAM) through the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE), launching a multi-year partnership focused on systems alignment and instructional coherence. Together, this work extended across six schools, each bringing its own strengths, history, and readiness for improvement.

To scale the IAM model, Matt Navo, Executive Director of CCEE, approached the Madera County Superintendent of Schools (MCSOS) with a proposal for countywide implementation. County Superintendent Tricia Protzman embraced the opportunity to build capacity through an intensive model grounded in professional learning communities. With CCEE’s partnership, PLCs became the structure supporting district improvement efforts across the county.

The MCSOS Educational Services team assumed leadership of the countywide effort. Led by Program Director Amy Tarantino Jones and strengthened through PLC training facilitated by Rich Smith of Engaged Learning Center, the team established a shared understanding and operational plan. By aligning varied leadership experiences and clarifying roles, the team deepened its PLC expertise while functioning intentionally as a county guiding coalition.

Work with Madera Unified and Yosemite Unified began in late spring 2025. From the outset, the MCSOS team prioritized foundational knowledge of professional learning communities, recognizing that sustainable PLC practices require more than just structures — they require shared understanding. The PLC at Work framework emphasizes mission, vision, and collective commitments as the starting point and as implementation unfolded in each district, it became clear why that sequence matters. Sustainable change begins with culture.

Although teams were eager to begin content standards work early on, we invested substantial time in strengthening the four pillars of the PLC model: mission, vision, collective commitments, and goals. This deliberate “go slow to go fast” approach was critical before beginning the technical work.

Developing collective commitments required honest dialogue and thoughtful collaboration. Guiding coalitions engaged in meaningful conversations that surfaced shared beliefs about student learning and clarified expectations for adult practice. The result was a set of commitments that provided accountability to move the work forward.

With those foundations in place, teams turned to building units of study, but identifying essential standards proved more nuanced than anticipated. In one district, districtwide essential standards created opportunities for school teams to collaborate and strengthen ownership. In the other, teachers expanded their capacity in identifying essential standards and unpacking them effectively.

Eight months into implementation, there is so much to celebrate! Teachers are collaborating more intentionally and reflecting on practice. Principals are monitoring teamwork with greater clarity and guiding coalitions continue to clarify roles while strengthening collective leadership, particularly at the district level. Conversations are increasingly centered on student learning, and the use of data to inform instruction is becoming more consistent.

For MCSOS, this work has required growth as well. While supporting districts, we strengthened our own collaborative structures and internal alignment. One lesson stands out: productive dissonance is a natural part of meaningful improvement. When foundations are strong, tension becomes a catalyst for clarity rather than a barrier to progress.

At the county level, coherence guides our work as we align state priorities, county support, and district practice. Within that alignment, PLCs serve as the structure connecting leadership expectations to classroom instruction and student outcomes.

Our partnership with CCEE and the trust built alongside Madera Unified and Yosemite Unified have strengthened Madera County’s capacity to deliver a coherent system of support. Over the next two years, we will deepen that coherence—ensuring structures for student learning are increasingly aligned, collaboration is seamless, and responsibility for results is shared. Together, we will continue strengthening alignment across our system while maintaining a clear and disciplined focus on student outcomes.

For more information about Madera County’s PLC efforts, please contact Amy Tarantino Jones, Ed.D., Program Director, Madera County Superintendent of Schools, at 559-673-5569 or [email protected]

Across California, educators are working to improve outcomes for middle and high school students through investments in community schools, career pathways, dual enrollment, and expanded student supports. These efforts reflect a shared commitment to student success. The Secondary School Redesign Pilot builds on that foundation by focusing on the design of schools themselves.

Rather than introducing new initiatives, the California Secondary School Redesign Pilot asks how secondary schools themselves can be redesigned so that learning experiences, relationships, schedules, and supports are aligned to better serve today’s students.

The pilot is led by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence in partnership with the California Department of Education and the State Board of Education, and was authorized through AB 121 (2025). It is designed as a statewide learning effort that builds on the work already underway in schools and districts across California.

An application process launched in late October drew 56 applications statewide, reflecting strong interest from networks engaged in rethinking middle and high school design. From this pool, 14 school networks were selected to participate, representing more than 100 schools across 65 districts at varying stages of redesign. These networks bring diverse regional, demographic, and instructional contexts, along with deep experience in secondary improvement efforts.

While the approaches across participating networks vary, the pilot is anchored in a shared understanding of what effective secondary schools require. The work centers on ensuring that every student is known and supported through strong relationships and systems of care. It emphasizes learning experiences that foster deeper knowledge and skills, including critical thinking, collaboration, and real-world application. It prioritizes personalized learning and supports that respond to students’ strengths, needs, and interests, while using evidence of learning and engagement to guide continuous improvement. Underlying all of this is a focus on building sustainable structures—such as schedules, staffing models, and professional learning—that allow redesign efforts to endure over time.

Through the pilot, CCEE is partnering with participating networks to learn alongside them. The goal is not to identify a single model of redesign, but to better understand the conditions that make effective secondary school redesign possible across varied contexts. This includes examining how redesigned school structures interact with existing state investments, such as community schools, career pathways, and dual enrollment, and how greater coherence across these efforts can support more equitable outcomes for students.

Over the next 18 months, the pilot will focus on documenting promising practices, surfacing common challenges, and supporting shared learning across networks. Insights from this work will contribute to broader statewide understanding and help inform future policy and practice related to secondary education in California.

Click the button below to learn more about the California Secondary School Redesign Pilot and participating networks.