4 Steps State Education Agencies Can Take to Build Instructional Coherence
States have a critical role to play in helping school and system leaders determine the best strategies to improve instruction and student learning. It’s essential for SEAs to take stock of the guidance they offer to schools and systems and ensure that they’re advancing a clear, unified strategy to support instruction and improve student learning.
But we know that is no easy task for any large, bureaucratic institution.
Instruction Partners’ work with SEAs across the country—and a review of hundreds of state-issued guidance documents—reveals a common and growing challenge: even well-meaning efforts to support instructional improvement often result in fragmented or conflicting guidance for schools and systems.
One key reason for this fragmentation is how work is typically organized within SEAs. Staff often operate in siloed divisions shaped by federal funding streams, legislative mandates, and internal structures—making cross-team coordination challenging. As a result, staff who provide coaching or technical assistance (e.g., state reading coaches or school improvement coaches) may simultaneously—and unknowingly—promote different strategies for instructional improvement.
Why instructional coherence matters
In each of the states where we’ve worked to strengthen instructional coherence, SEA leaders were aware of coherence issues—but often underestimated the scope of the problem. Our analysis of guidance documents revealed that many states were advancing as many as six distinct approaches to instructional improvement at a time. Though some of these instructional approaches can operate in harmony, others create confusion in schools when implemented simultaneously.
When multiple SEA teams issue high volumes of concurrent—and at times, incompatible—directives, school and system leaders can be left unsure not only how to improve instruction but which priorities they’re truly accountable for. That confusion can then trickle down, making it difficult for instructional leaders to provide focused support for teachers—hindering improvement efforts and ultimately limiting student learning gains.
But when a state aligns around a shared approach to improving instruction, everyone—from agency teams to classroom teachers—can move in the same direction, making real, lasting improvement more achievable.
Want to dive deeper into what’s driving misalignment?
Download our full white paper to learn more about the six distinct instructional improvement approaches we uncovered in state-issued guidance—or keep reading for four practical steps to strengthen instructional coherence in your state.
Here’s how state education agencies can build instructional coherence
Based on what we’ve learned through working with many state agencies to understand and strengthen state-level instructional coherence, we’re sharing four practical steps that states can take to build and sustain that coherence.
1) Explicitly decide on an approach to instructional improvement.
Start by naming how your agency believes schools improve instruction—especially in schools identified for state intervention (i.e., schools in improvement status). Gather input from your stakeholders and take stock of the instructional approaches currently reflected in your state’s guidance. This will likely involve mapping existing documents to surface implicit models and understand what schools are being asked to implement. Then, establish a clear process for selecting a primary improvement approach (or approaches), including who will inform and make decisions and how the evidence base will be reviewed. Once an instructional improvement approach is selected, communicate the decision clearly—including naming the competing approaches that the agency will no longer promote.
2) Commit to aligning guidance, support, and accountability measures to the approach.
Once you’ve identified a central approach, audit your agency’s materials to ensure everything aligns—from guidance documents to school visit protocols. If something conflicts, revise or clarify it. Start with written guidance, and expand to plans, funding applications, coaching tools, and accountability measures—making explicit how each should be implemented in alignment with the core approach(es). Remember: the goal isn’t just aligned documents; it’s coherent, meaningful support for schools from across the agency.
3) Build a shared understanding to set SEA staff up for success.
Don’t assume everyone on your team shares the same level of understanding—or even the same definition—of the selected approach to instructional improvement. Invest time in building shared understanding through shared experiences. Host joint learning sessions, classroom visits, or unit studies that ground the team in what effective instruction looks like in practice. Encourage open dialogue by creating space for staff to reflect on their own experiences and perspectives, and to connect those reflections back to the agency’s theory of change—making the implicit explicit as a team. This upfront investment will help prevent misalignment down the road.
4) Sustain the work over time.
Coherence isn’t a one-and-done effort—it’s an ongoing process. Establish regular routines, like quarterly guidance reviews or annual updates to school planning templates, to stay on track. Continue to host cross-agency school visits and other shared learning experiences to prevent siloing and stay grounded in how improvement strategies are playing out in classrooms. As context, leadership, and policies change, these routines can help ensure your agency stays focused on what matters most: student learning.
A path forward
In this white paper, we take a closer look at the widespread misalignment across state-issued instructional guidance—and share what state leaders can do to build greater coherence.
With focused, aligned leadership, SEAs can chart a clearer path forward—one that better supports schools, empowers teachers, and ultimately improves outcomes for students.
About the authors
Alison Procopio brings over a decade of experience working at the College Board, where she led policy design, advocacy strategies, and the measurement of K–12 policy implementation. Her work focused on guiding state and district leadership in the development of strategic, collaborative, and data-driven planning solutions and partnerships, all aimed at expanding access to college and career opportunities for all students. At Instruction Partners, Procopio leads the design and delivery of services targeted for state leaders, focused on the conditions for instructional leadership and building the capacity of state/regional coaches.
Jess Box is a seasoned instructional leader with experience working at the state and district levels as well as working in nonprofits to provide strategic instructional support to district and state leaders. Most recently, she served as a member of EdReports organizational leadership team, where she led the effort to expand EdReports’ services to support states and districts to raise awareness of the need for high-quality instructional materials, lead smart adoption processes, and conduct quality local curriculum reviews. At Instruction Partners, Box leads our consulting services with state agencies, focusing in particular on supporting state teams to strengthen the coherence of their guidance, support, and accountability for schools and school systems.
