How Is Your School Really Doing?

— A Free Systems Reality Check

First, tell us a little about your school.

1–3 years — still building the foundation

4–7 years — established but still growing

8+ years — mature but may have inherited systems

Individually — this is my own honest perspective

As a team — we're completing this together

Under 150

150-300

301-500

500+

AREA 1 — Teaming & Alignment

A quick note: When we refer to your "leadership team," we mean anyone in your building who leads work, a team, or an initiative — not just administrators. This includes grade level leads, department chairs, instructional coaches, data leads, PLC facilitators, and anyone else responsible for moving work forward with others.

Yes — our teams are connected, their work is aligned, and it shows

Partially — some teams are aligned but others operate in silos with little connection to the bigger picture

No — teams exist and work hard but there's little horizontal or vertical alignment across them

We have the right teams in place, they meet consistently, have clear purposes, and their work connects across the school

We have teams but meetings are often unfocused — a lot gets covered but little gets resolved or connected back to school goals

We have teams because we're supposed to — but honestly, most of them aren't functioning in a way that moves the school forward

Our teaming structure needs a complete reset — we have too many teams, not enough alignment, and people are exhausted by meetings that don't lead anywhere

Yes — our systems live in the school, not just in people

Partially — some things are documented but most institutional knowledge leaves when people do

No — we lose significant ground every time someone transitions out

Yes — we think short and long-term and have systems in place to manage transitions

Partially — we plan sometimes but we're often caught off guard when things change

No — we're largely in survival mode — focused on getting through the week, the month, or the semester

AREA 2 — Time & Scheduling

A quick note: This area is about how time is structured for everyone in your building —

students AND adults. Master schedules, collaboration time, leadership time, and how protected that time actually is in practice versus on paper.

Our schedule was intentionally designed around what students need most and what adults need to support them — and we revisit it regularly

Our schedule started with good intentions but has been patched and adjusted so many times it no longer reflects our priorities

Our schedule was built around logistics, compliance requirements, and what was convenient — student and adult needs were secondary

We inherited our schedule and haven't had the capacity or clarity to rebuild it in a way that actually serves our school

Yes — collaboration time is protected, purposeful, and used well

Partially — time exists on paper but gets pulled, shortened, or repurposed regularly

No — there is no consistent protected time for adult collaboration in our school

I have structured time for strategic thinking, observing instruction, and coaching my team — and I protect it

I intend to prioritize those things but daily operations and urgent needs consume most of my time

I am almost entirely reactive — I rarely get ahead of what's coming and strategic work happens in stolen moments

I'm not sure my time reflects my actual priorities — I know something needs to change but I haven't figured out how

AREA 3 — Data & Decision-Making

A quick note: This area isn't about whether you have data — most schools do. It's about whether data is actually being used to drive decisions, inform support, and create a shared understanding across your whole school. And when we say data, we mean all of it — not just academics.

Data is a regular part of how we operate — we collect it consistently, review it together, and it actually changes what we do

We collect data because we're required to — but using it to drive real decisions is inconsistent at best

We have data but nobody's quite sure what to do with it — it sits in spreadsheets and reports that rarely get acted on

Data feels overwhelming — we have too much coming from too many places and no clear system for making sense of it

Yes — data informs our decisions at every level

Partially — data shows up in some conversations but not consistently across all decision-making

No — most decisions are made based on instinct, urgency, or whoever is most vocal in the room

We look at a full picture — academic performance, attendance, behavior, social-emotional data, family engagement, staff survey data, implementation fidelity, and school culture data

We look at academic data consistently but other data types like attendance, behavior, and culture show up less regularly or not at all

Honestly, our data conversations are almost entirely about academics — and even then, mostly about who is struggling and where the gaps are

We don't have a consistent or structured data conversation — different people look at different things with no shared process

Yes — we use data to understand strengths and build on them, not just identify deficits

Partially — we try to look at both but deficit thinking tends to dominate our data conversations

No — our data conversations are almost always focused on what's not working and who's behind

Yes — data conversations happen at multiple levels and staff are informed and involved

Partially — leadership understands the data but it doesn't consistently reach or involve the people doing the daily work

No — data is largely a leadership or compliance conversation that staff aren't meaningfully part of

AREA 4 — Instruction & Implementation

A quick note: This area is about whether your school has a clear, shared vision for what instruction should look like — and whether that vision is actually being implemented consistently. Starting things is easy. Making them stick is the work.

We have a clear, shared instructional framework that leaders and teachers understand, use consistently, and that gets monitored and refined regularly

We have an instructional vision but what it looks like in practice varies significantly from classroom to classroom and teacher to teacher

Instruction in our school largely depends on the individual teacher — there is no consistent school-wide approach to what good instruction looks like here

We are still in the process of defining what instruction should look like in our school — we haven't landed on a shared framework yet

We had a clear implementation plan — training, support, monitoring, and adjustment built in — and we followed through on it

We launched with good intentions and strong training but follow-through, monitoring, and sustainability broke down over time

We introduced it but there was no real implementation plan — it was announced, maybe trained on once, and then left to individuals to figure out

We introduce things regularly but rarely see them fully implemented — we're known for starting things we don't finish

Yes — onboarding is structured, documented, and doesn't depend on who happens to be available to train them

Partially — onboarding exists but it's inconsistent depending on the time of year, who's leading it, or how busy we are when someone joins

No — new staff largely figure things out on their own — we know this is a gap but haven't been able to address it

AREA 5 — Accountability & Action Planning

A quick note: This area is about whether your school has real structures for following through — not just planning. It's also about whether your school is operating proactively or reactively — because that determines everything about your capacity to build and sustain anything.

We operate from a clear short and long-term plan — urgent needs still come up but we have systems that keep us from losing ground when they do

We have plans but reactive situations pull us off track regularly — we spend more time catching up than moving forward

We are largely in survival mode — we're focused on getting through the week, the month, or the semester and long-term planning feels like a luxury we can't afford right now

Every day feels like a fire drill — we are almost entirely reactive and building systems feels impossible from where we are

We assigned clear ownership, built in checkpoints to monitor progress, adjusted when needed, and the plan actually guided our work

We started strong but implementation stalled — competing priorities took over and the plan was rarely referenced after it was created

The plan was created because it was required — it hasn't been meaningfully referenced or used to drive decisions since

We struggle to get to the planning stage at all — urgent needs take over before we can think strategically

Yes — ownership is clear, accountability is part of our culture, and hard conversations happen when they need to

Partially — some things are clear but accountability is inconsistent — we avoid hard conversations more than we should

No — ownership is murky, accountability conversations rarely happen, and problems tend to linger because addressing them feels too risky or too hard

Yes — we address problems directly and move with urgency when something is off

Partially — we notice problems but honest conversations and decisive action are inconsistent depending on who's involved or what the issue is

No — problems tend to sit longer than they should — the culture around naming and addressing what isn't working is something we're still building

One last question —

and it's the most important one.