DoWEA's HQIP framework — unpacked, practiced, and embedded into GES's daily instructional identity. Replacing MTSS compliance language with an Excellent First Instruction mindset and the observable classroom moves that make it real.
The DoWEA director replaced MTSS compliance language with a single, powerful frame: Excellent First Instruction. HQIP is the DoWEA-defined set of practices that makes "excellent" observable, learnable, and sustainable.
The shift from MTSS to Excellent First Instruction is not semantic — it is strategic. MTSS asked: "Who is failing and what intervention do they need?" HQIP asks: "Is the first instruction so strong that fewer students need intervention at all?" This series builds the instructional practices that answer that second question — every day, in every classroom.
HQIP is the umbrella. Explicit Instruction (Series 1) builds Pillar 2. CKLA (Series 2) provides content for Pillars 1 and 3. AI + Data (Series 3) powers Pillar 5. Parent Communication (Series 5) supports Pillar 6. This series ties it all together — giving teachers and the principal a shared observation language that connects every series to the same north star.
Before GES can talk about instruction consistently, every teacher and the principal need shared vocabulary. This session builds that vocabulary — making HQIP concrete, not abstract.
| Time | Activity | Description | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0:00–0:15 | LaunchThe Best Lesson You Ever Taught | "Think of the best lesson you ever taught — or the best lesson you ever observed. What made it great? What did you see, hear, feel?" Write for 2 minutes, share in pairs. Principal collects words on chart paper. Notice: most of the words map onto the HQIP pillars. The framework isn't foreign — it names what great teachers already do. | Write → pairs → chart |
| 0:15–0:35 | TeachHQIP: The Framework | Present the six pillars. For each: what it is, what it looks like in a GES classroom, and why it matters for our students specifically. Use concrete examples from GES grade bands. Emphasize: this is not a new program — it is a description of what good teaching is, built on 40 years of research. | Whole group |
| 0:35–0:55 | CompareHQIP vs. "Adequate" — Video Analysis | Show two 3-minute lesson clips (or principal-facilitated role plays): one demonstrating clear HQIP alignment, one demonstrating adequate but not excellent instruction. Teachers observe using a 3-column note: "HQIP I see" / "Partially present" / "Missing." Debrief: where's the difference? What's the student experience in each? | Observation + debrief |
| 0:55–1:20 | ConnectHQIP + What We Already Do | Grade-band groups: map GES's current instructional practices to the HQIP pillars. Where are we already strong? Where are the gaps? Where do our current programs (Benchmark Advance, Reveal Math, STAR) explicitly support HQIP? Build a "what we have / what we need" grid. Share across bands — notice whole-school patterns. | Band groups → gallery |
| 1:20–1:40 | Self-AssessHonest Personal HQIP Snapshot | Each teacher completes a brief 6-pillar self-assessment: rate each pillar 1–4 based on current practice. This is private — it informs coaching, not evaluation. Principal previews how this feeds into the coaching plan: "I want to support your highest-priority growth area." | Individual (private) |
| 1:40–2:00 | CommitMy HQIP North Star | Each teacher identifies their single highest-priority HQIP pillar for this series — the one where improvement would most impact their students. Write it as a commitment: "I am going to focus on [Pillar X] because [reason grounded in student data or observation]." Cards submitted to principal — drives coaching conversations. | Individual |
Practice is absent or inconsistent. Teacher may be aware of the practice but hasn't yet integrated it into regular instruction. Students experience it occasionally or not at all.
Practice is present but inconsistent. Teacher understands the intent but application varies by lesson, day, or mood. Students experience it some of the time.
Practice is consistent and intentional. Teacher plans for it and delivers it reliably. Students experience it in most lessons. Some gaps remain in application.
Practice is fluent and responsive. Teacher adapts it to student needs in real time. Students experience it consistently and can describe how it helps them learn.
Shared language only matters if it points to observable, teachable behaviors. This session translates each HQIP pillar into specific, visible classroom moves — things a principal or peer can see and a teacher can practice.
| Time | Activity | Description | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0:00–0:15 | LaunchEvidence vs. Interpretation | The critical distinction for HQIP walkthroughs: evidence is what you see and hear. Interpretation is what you conclude. Practice: teacher says "Good job, everyone." Evidence: the words used. Interpretation: praise was non-specific and didn't reinforce learning. Teachers practice scripting 5 classroom moments as evidence only — no conclusions. | Pairs + share |
| 0:15–0:50 | BuildObservable Indicators Jigsaw | Six groups, one pillar each. Each group: (1) defines what "present" looks like for their pillar (observable, specific), (2) defines what "absent" or "surface-level" looks like, (3) identifies 3 scripted observation examples. Groups become pillar experts and teach the rest of the staff. Build shared HQIP Observable Moves Reference (below). | Expert jigsaw |
| 0:50–1:10 | PracticeScripted Observation Practice | Show a 5-minute classroom video (or live role play). All teachers script what they observe using evidence language. Compare notes: what did you capture? What did you miss? Whose evidence was most specific? Whose was most interpretive? Build the habit of scripting before evaluating. | Individual → whole |
| 1:10–1:35 | DesignGrade-Band HQIP Lesson Design | Each grade-band group designs one lesson segment that intentionally demonstrates all 6 HQIP pillars. They annotate the lesson: "Pillar 1 here — because..." and share with another group who identifies what's present and what's missing. Feedback protocol: evidence-based, not opinion-based. | Band groups |
| 1:35–2:00 | PlanPersonal Implementation Target | Each teacher selects their HQIP focus pillar from Session 1. They write one specific observable move they'll implement in every lesson for the next two weeks. "When I [situation], I will [specific HQIP move] so that students can [learning impact]." This becomes the coaching observation focus for Cycle 2. | Individual |
| Pillar | ✅ Observable Evidence (Present) | ⚠️ Not HQIP (Absent or Surface) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Clear Learning Goal | Teacher states objective in student language and refers back to it during the lesson. Students can explain what they are learning when asked. Success criteria are visible and specific. | "SWBAT" written on board but never referenced. Teacher cannot say what mastery looks like. Students say "I don't know" when asked what the lesson is about. |
| 2. Explicit Instruction | I Do is present with think-aloud. Multiple examples before release. Teacher models errors and corrects them explicitly. Gradual release is visible in the lesson structure. | Teacher tells students what to do without modeling. "Any questions?" is the only check before releasing. Students discover the process through trial and error without a model. |
| 3. Active Engagement | All students are responding, writing, or discussing. Off-task behavior is minimal and addressed. Students are working on tasks that require academic thinking, not just completion. | One student talks while 20 listen. Worksheets are completed without academic conversation. "Engagement" is sitting quietly and following directions. |
| 4. Checking for Understanding | Multiple CFU techniques used. All students respond simultaneously. Teacher scans all responses before continuing. Instruction adjusts based on what CFU reveals. | "Does everyone understand?" Calls on raised hands only. Continues after one correct answer. No visible change in instruction based on student responses. |
| 5. Responsive Instruction | Teacher re-teaches when CFU reveals confusion. Pacing is driven by mastery, not the clock. High-growth students receive extension while struggling students receive additional modeling. | Lesson proceeds on a fixed timeline regardless of student understanding. "We'll come back to that." All students get the same instruction regardless of demonstrated understanding. |
| 6. Positive Learning Environment | Students take academic risks without fear of ridicule. Errors are treated as learning opportunities. Teacher communicates genuine belief in every student's capacity. STAR norms are alive, not posted. | Only correct answers are acknowledged. Students look to peers before responding. STAR is on the wall but rarely referenced. Praise is generic or absent. |
HQIP is only powerful if the principal and teachers share a language for talking about instruction. This session builds that language — and shifts observations from judgment events to learning conversations.
HQIP walkthroughs are NOT formal evaluations. They are 10–15 minute learning visits designed to capture evidence of the six pillars — and to generate a 5-minute coaching conversation afterward. Teachers know the purpose. The walkthrough tool is shared with the teacher before the visit. Evidence is shared, not filed.
| Time | Activity | Description | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0:00–0:15 | DebriefImplementation Share | Teachers share their HQIP focus pillar implementation from the last two weeks: "I tried [specific move]. Here's what happened. Here's one thing I noticed." Surface: what's working across the school? What's the hardest pillar to implement consistently? That becomes Session 4's focus. | Small groups → whole |
| 0:15–0:35 | TeachThe HQIP Walkthrough Protocol | Walk through the walkthrough protocol: (1) teacher knows the visit is coming (not surprise evaluations), (2) principal uses the HQIP Walkthrough Tool (see separate tab), (3) evidence is scripted — not rated in the moment, (4) 5-minute post-visit conversation within 24 hours, (5) data aggregated monthly to identify school-wide trends, never to rank individual teachers. | Whole group |
| 0:35–0:55 | PracticeFeedback Language Lab | Pairs practice the post-walkthrough conversation. Provide scripted scenario: principal observed 12 minutes of a lesson, scripted 6 evidence statements. Practice: (1) teacher self-reflects first, (2) principal shares 2 specific evidence-based strengths, (3) principal asks one question that opens growth, (4) together set one specific next step. Role-play twice — switch roles. | Pairs |
| 0:55–1:20 | LivePrincipal Walkthrough + Debrief | Principal conducts a live 12-minute walkthrough of a volunteer teacher's classroom (or simulated via video). All staff observe the walkthrough protocol live. Afterward: principal models the post-visit conversation. Staff debrief: what did you notice about the observation? The conversation? The language used? | Live demonstration |
| 1:20–1:40 | AnalyzeAggregating Walkthrough Data | Show a model of what 3 weeks of walkthrough data looks like when aggregated across the school: which pillars are consistently strong? Which are inconsistently present? Which differ significantly by grade band? How does this data drive PD priorities? How does it NOT drive individual teacher evaluation? | Whole group |
| 1:40–2:00 | CommitWalkthrough Schedule + Consent | Principal shares the GES walkthrough calendar for the next 4 weeks. Teachers understand: what the principal will look for, how evidence will be shared with them, and how data will be used at the school level. Every teacher signs the "walkthrough partnership agreement" — not compliance, covenant. | Whole group |
HQIP must not be another program that fades in April. The final session embeds HQIP into GES's institutional identity — so it shows up in hiring, onboarding, FC meetings, and how teachers talk to each other about instruction.
| Time | Activity | Description | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0:00–0:20 | CelebrateHQIP Growth Showcase | Teachers display one artifact from their HQIP journey across the series: a lesson plan with pillar annotations, student work that reflects a pillar in action, a coaching note, or a reflection. Gallery walk. Sticky note feedback: "I see Pillar [X] here because..." Celebrate growth — name it specifically. | Gallery walk |
| 0:20–0:40 | DesignHQIP-Embedded FC Meetings | The current FC meeting protocol asks: "What are students learning? How do we know? What do we do next?" Layer HQIP in: "Which pillar is our current instructional focus? What evidence do we have of its presence? What's our collective next move?" Design the HQIP-embedded FC agenda template. This lives in every meeting going forward. | Whole group → groups |
| 0:40–1:00 | PlanNew Teacher Onboarding Through HQIP | GES regularly receives new teachers mid-year and at the start of each year. How do we onboard them into HQIP without a 4-session series? Design: (1) a 30-minute HQIP orientation for new teachers, (2) a buddy system pairing new teachers with HQIP-proficient peers, (3) the first coaching visit timing and focus. Build the onboarding flow together. | Groups → whole |
| 1:00–1:20 | BuildHQIP in Hiring | Principal leads: how do we hire for HQIP-aligned teachers? Draft 3 HQIP-grounded interview questions and 3 teaching demonstration look-fors. Sample question: "Walk me through how you check for understanding in the middle of a lesson — not at the end." Look-for: does the candidate name specific techniques? Do they adjust instruction based on what they see? Build the GES HQIP hiring rubric. | Whole group |
| 1:20–1:40 | ReflectHQIP Identity Statement | Each teacher writes their HQIP identity statement: "At GES, I am a teacher who [describes their HQIP practice]. My students experience [describe the impact]. My one growth edge is [honest naming of development area], and my plan is [specific, actionable next step]." Share in triads. Principal responds to each triad with one specific, genuine observation. | Individual → triads |
| 1:40–2:00 | CloseThe GES Instructional Identity | Principal closes the full 6-series PL system with this session. "We started with explicit instruction and we're ending with a school-wide identity. Every series connects to the same belief: every child at GES deserves excellent instruction on day one — not when they've been identified, not when a program kicks in, but every day. That is who we are." Formal recognition of teacher growth across the year. | Whole group |
A working observation instrument. Rate each indicator, add scripted evidence notes, and save or print. Share the completed record with the teacher within 24 hours of the visit.
Script evidence first — rate after. Notes should be verbatim or near-verbatim quotes from the classroom. Share the completed record with the teacher within 24 hours. This record is a coaching tool, not an evaluation document.