OWL Maturity Model for Learner-Centered Innovation

Owner: Director of Orgazational Strategy & Learning (DOSL) – with input from all Directors Audience: All OWL staff, partners, and stakeholders

Background and Purpose

The OWL Maturity Model for Learner-Centered Innovation is a flexible tool that helps any school, district, network, or other learning community make an honest, shared assessment of where they are on the journey toward a culture of authentic, learner-centered innovation. It focuses on systemic, culture-level conditions instead of isolated programs or specific classroom strategies. It does this by asking:

• How does your mission, vision, and values—i.e. your "why"—show up in daily practice?

• How are innovation, creativity, and continuous improvement woven into the fabric of the school?

• Where do open sharing, collaboration, and collective leadership truly live in your systems, not just your words?

The model grows out of Open Way Learning’s theory of change and from an evolving database of practices that were originally synthesized for Open Up, Education! and have been continually refined through OWL’s work with schools, students, and community partners.

The intent of the model is not to rank schools against each other, but to give school and district teams a structured way to ask better questions, see their local culture more clearly, and design smarter and more customized pathways to improvement (vs. just chasing the latest edufads and calling it innovation).

The model is available in three complementary formats, each serving a distinct purpose in the journey toward a learner-centered culture:

• Maturity Model Rubric (Google Sheet) – This is the core, “single-point rubric” version of the model. Instead of scoring yourself across a long scale, you compare your current reality against a clear description of what strong practice can look like for specific elements within each dimension, including linked and vetted articles, examples, and other “images of possibility” that help bring deeper meaning and context to that element. The rubric helps teams name where they are now, identify concrete gaps, and define next steps. It is especially useful for structured self-assessment, prioritizing focus areas, and tracking growth over time.

• Maturity Model Cards (printable slides) – The card set turns the same ideas from the rubric into a more tactile, conversational tool. Each card highlights a key practice, mindset, or condition in concise, accessible language. Teams can sort, cluster, and sequence cards to tell the story of where they are and where they want to go. The cards work well for retreats, design sessions, PLCs, school improvement meetings, and student/community engagement because they lower the barrier to participation and invite multiple perspectives.

• Master Document (this guide) – This written version provides the narrative “backbone” of the model. It offers deeper explanations of each dimension, examples of what strong practice can look like, possible indicators of success, and pragmatic samples of possible next steps. It is useful for school leaders, design teams, and improvement facilitators who need shared language to anchor continuous improvement work, onboard new stakeholders, or connect the model to other tools such as strategic plans, Aim Statements, Driver Diagrams, or PDSA cycles.

Schools and districts can engage with any single format or use them in combination. Some teams start with the cards to build shared language and feed the imagination, then move into the rubric to document a more specific self-assessment of current state. Others begin with this master document to ground their leadership team, then use the cards and rubric to involve staff, students, and families in the improvement process as it evolves. The goal in all cases is the same: use whichever version(s) best help your community see its current culture clearly, imagine what’s possible, and design a practical and customized pathway toward a more learner-centered culture of innovation.

Connection to the OWL Maturity Model for Student Success

The Maturity Model for Student Success focuses on what students experience in classrooms: safety and belonging, deep learning activities, high-quality facilitation, collective teacher efficacy, and leadership practices that sustain those conditions.

This Maturity Model for Learner-Centered Innovation model sits one level “upstream” by focusing on the whole-school/district systems and cultural conditions that make those classroom practices possible and sustainable. Used together, the two models help a school or district align:

• Culture and systems (this model)

• Classroom practice and student experience (Student Success model)

Teams can start with whichever entry point fits their context, then cross-walk between the two as their work matures.

Core Dimensions of Learner-Centered Innovation

This maturity model is organized around five interlocking culture dimensions, each represented in both the rubric and the card deck:

1. Innovation Ethos – How your school understands, prioritizes, and organizes for innovation and continuous improvement.

2. Open Source Sharing – How your community shares knowledge, stories, and resources inside and outside the school.

3. Radical Collaboration – How you move beyond silos so students and adults learn with and from one another.

4. Collective Leadership – How power, decision-making, and agency are distributed among students, educators, and families.

5. Living Mission & Vision – How your “why” is co-created, understood, and actually lived in everyday practice.

Across the card set, each dimension uses the metaphor “Igniting the spark → building a campfire → leveraging an innovation bonfire” to suggest growth from early pilots to a fully embedded culture.

How to Use This Model (Design Thinking + Improvement Science)

As mentioned above, this written guide is one of three complementary formats for this maturity model (along with the rubric and card deck). This version gives users more narrative context, examples, and suggested indicators/actions that work well within a Design Thinking and Improvement Science framework and as such, can be used on its own, or alongside the rubric and/or cards.

Below is a suggested flow that shows how one can merge the three model formats into a comprehensive process that is grounded in Design Thinking and Improvement Science:

Step 1 – Empathize and Frame the Challenge

• Start with student and community experience: empathy interviews, shadow-a-student, listening sessions, culture/climate data, and informal stories.

• Ask: Where do students currently experience (or not experience) learner-centered innovation in this school/district?

• Identify one or two pressing culture challenges you want to understand more deeply (e.g. “We have pockets of PBL in the school, but not a consistent culture of collaboration within and across departments”).

Step 2 – Explore the Model and Create a Shared Picture of “What’s Possible”

Using this document, the rubric, and/or the cards:

• Read the description of each dimension element and its practices.

• Use the “images of possibility” as provocations to establish what success could look like: If this were fully true here, what would students, families, and staff notice?

• Capture the characteristics of the above on sticky notes or a shared doc as a way to establish what’s possible.

Step 3 – Self-Assess the Current State (Single-Point Rubric)

• For each relevant practice (or at least ones you wish to prioritize for your local context based on your own goals, needs, and assets), compare your current reality to the “strong practice” descriptions.

• Agree on a simple status: e.g. Just starting → Emerging → Established → Exemplary (or a similar scale you prefer).

• For each area, note concrete evidence and examples (student work, schedules, PLC notes, artifacts, data) that support and justify your self-assessment.

Step 4 – Define a Focus and Write a Clear Aim Statement

• Choose 1–3 high-leverage practices or dimensions to focus on (pro tip: force rank each based on importance opposite your local goals and also based on relative feasibility).

• Draft a SMART Aim Statement that names your student-centered “north star” (e.g. “By June 2028, all 9th- and 10th-grade students will experience at least two public, community-facing projects per year that are co-designed with external partners.”).

Step 5 – Map Drivers and Change Ideas

• Use an Improvement Science driver diagram to identify primary and secondary drivers of that aim (e.g. schedule, PLC structures, grading policies, advisory, community partnerships).

• For each driver, brainstorm change ideas using the cards and practice descriptions as prompts.

Step 6 – Run Small PDSA Cycles

• Turn your change ideas into small tests of change using Plan–Do–Study–Act (PDSA) cycles.

• Collect light data: student feedback, quick pulse surveys, artifacts, short reflections.

• Study what happened and decide what to adopt, adapt, or abandon.

Step 7 – Document, Share, and Scale

• Capture bright spots and proof points: stories, visuals, short case studies.

• Use Open Source Sharing practices to share your learning beyond the initial team.

• As changes stabilize, adjust policies, schedules, and rituals so the new practices become part of the school’s “operating system,” not just a project.

Dimension 1: Innovation Ethos

Core idea: Innovation Ethos describes how a school understands innovation, how it evaluates “what works,” and how it weaves experimentation, continuous improvement, and learner-centered practices into everyday routines. It connects research, local assets, and student interests into a proactive improvement strategy rather than disconnected initiatives.

1.1 Evidence-Informed Improvement Mindset

What it looks like when this is strong

• The school regularly reviews research, case studies, and local data to identify practices that have strong evidence of impact, then adapts them thoughtfully to the local context.

• Continuous improvement is framed as “how we do school,” not as a one-off project or grant requirement.

• Staff can describe why core practices were chosen and how they are evolving.

Possible indicators

• Regular use of vetted research resources in planning (e.g. Hattie, PBL research, benchmarking studies).

• Documented cycles where research → local adaptation → reflection → refinement.

• Shared language around improvement (e.g. PDSA, root cause analysis) showing up in staff meetings and PLCs.

Sample next steps

• Create a small, cross-role “innovation & evidence” team to curate resources and guide pilots.

• Use a simple protocol (like “Connect–Extend–Challenge”) to help staff digest and apply research.

• Align improvement projects to a small number of clearly articulated aims.

1.2 Authentic Personalized Learning (Beyond Algorithms)

What it looks like

• Personalization is rooted in strong teacher-student relationships and knowledge of students’ interests, identities, and goals - not just software pathways.

• Students help co-design their paths, set goals, and reflect on progress.

• Technology is used as a tool to expand choice and feedback, not to narrow learning.

Possible indicators

• Advisory or mentoring systems that enable adults to know students well.

• Student goal-setting and reflection embedded in advisory, conferences, or portfolios.

• Community/family feedback indicates that students feel “seen” and supported as individuals.

Sample next steps

• Pilot student-led conferences in one grade band and study the impact.

• Audit tech tools to ensure they support, rather than replace, human connection.

• Co-create student profiles that capture interests, strengths, and hopes alongside academic data.

1.3 Experiential and Interdisciplinary Learning as a Norm

What it looks like

• The school emphasizes rich experiential learning (project, place, phenomenon, and problem-based) that connects to what students care about and to future pathways.

• STEM experiences are inclusive, interdisciplinary, and accessible to all learners, especially those historically underrepresented.

Possible indicators

• Percentage of courses or units that include authentic projects tied to real audiences or problems.

• Representation data showing equitable access to advanced STEM, CTE, and capstone experiences.

Sample next steps

• Identify one interdisciplinary project per grade that all students will experience.

• Use an equity lens to re-design entry requirements and recruitment for STEM/advanced courses.

• Partner with community organizations to co-design place-, problem-, phenomenon-, or project- based units.

1.4 Mastery-Oriented Grading and Feedback

What it looks like

• The school is moving away from a purely A–F, points-driven model toward mastery or competency-based approaches that emphasize growth and clear learning targets.

• Grades and feedback help students understand what they know, what’s next, and how to get there.

Possible indicators

• Pilot or whole-school use of competency-based reporting in at least one course or grade span.

• Student and family understanding of what mastery means in key disciplines.

Sample next steps

• Pilot standards-based grading in one course or team with clear communication and feedback loops.

• Develop cross-disciplinary “success skills” rubrics aligned to a Portrait of a Graduate.

Dimension 2: Open Source Sharing

Core idea: Open Source Sharing is about how your school treats knowledge, stories, and resources - as private property or as a shared commons. It includes transparency, vulnerability, and routine sharing of both finished products and “works in progress” with internal and external audiences.

2.1 Knowledge Sharing as a Cultural Norm

What it looks like

• The learning community values sharing insights, not just numeric data. Staff regularly surface what they’re trying, learning, and questioning.

• Teams use protocols and routines to make practice visible and discuss it openly.

Possible indicators

• Regular use of structures like tuning protocols, lesson study, or instructional rounds.

• Shared digital spaces where teachers post and remix lessons, tasks, and assessments.

Sample next steps

• Launch a monthly “learning story” share-out at staff meetings.

• Choose one PLC protocol focused on making practice visible and use it consistently for a semester.

2.2 Public Products and Work-in-Progress

What it looks like

• Students routinely share their work with audiences beyond the classroom, including drafts and reflections - not only polished products.

• Exhibitions, community showcases, and digital portfolios are scheduled, supported, and celebrated.

Possible indicators

• All students participate in at least one public exhibition of learning each year.

• Community members report better understanding of student work and school priorities.

Sample next steps

• Pilot a “Share Your Learning” night for one grade band, then iterate.

• Support teachers to design rubrics that value reflection, revision, and communication, not just the final product.

2.3 Fail-Forward and Transparency

What it looks like

• Adults model vulnerability by acknowledging mistakes, sharing failed attempts, and focusing on what was learned.

• Students experience risk-friendly environments where “intelligent failure” is normal.

Possible indicators

• Staff and students can name times when a failure was openly discussed and led to changes.

• Decrease in punitive responses to mistakes; increase in restorative and learning-oriented responses.

Sample next steps

• Incorporate “failure stories” as a standard reflection prompt in PLCs or advisory.

• Co-design norms with students about how the community responds when things don’t go as planned.

2.4 Whole-Child Data and OER Use

What it looks like

• Teachers regularly meet to discuss “whole child” information (academic, social-emotional, engagement) using an asset-based lens.

• Staff use, share, and remix Open Educational Resources (OER), both to expand access and to build local professional capacity.

Possible indicators

• Schedules show regular time for cross-role student support meetings.

• Growing library of remixed OER aligned resources to your local Portrait of a Graduate.

Sample next steps

• Pilot an early-warning and response routine that blends quantitative and qualitative data.

• Host an internal “OER remix jam” where teams adapt open resources and share back.

Dimension 3: Radical Collaboration

Core idea: Radical Collaboration is about intentionally dismantling isolation and competition so that curiosity, creativity, and generosity can thrive. It encompasses how adults collaborate with each other, how students work together, and how the school connects with external partners.

3.1 High-Functioning, Equity-Focused PLCs

What it looks like

• PLCs focus on meaningful collaboration and equity, not just logistics or compliance.

• Teams use shared protocols to look at student work, examine disparities, and design responses.

Possible indicators

• PLC artifacts show cycles of inquiry: question → data → action → reflection.

• Evidence that historically marginalized students are centered in conversations.

Sample next steps

• Re-set PLC purpose and norms with a focus on collaborative problem-solving and equity.

• Train PLC leads in protocols that prioritize student work and shared decision-making.

3.2 Scaffolding Collaboration for Adults and Students

What it looks like

• Teachers and students are supported in moving from isolation to authentic co-creation: structures, tools, and norms make collaboration less risky and more effective.

Possible indicators

• Increased use of collaborative inquiry and group problem-solving that goes beyond “divide and conquer.”

• Student surveys showing growth in collaboration skills and comfort.

Sample next steps

• Introduce a small set of thinking routines and collaboration structures school-wide.

• Provide explicit instruction on collaboration skills (roles, norms, feedback) in multiple grades.

3.3 Space, Time, and Structures for Collaboration

What it looks like

• Physical spaces and schedules are intentionally designed for collaboration: flexible rooms, common planning times, cross-grade structures.

• Job-embedded professional learning replaces “sit and get” PD.

Possible indicators

• Master schedule shows protected collaboration blocks for staff and students.

• Frequent use of collaborative learning spaces (not just traditional rows of desks).

Sample next steps

• Map your existing schedule and spaces, then run a quick PDSA on one structural change (e.g. cross-grade planning time, flexible block).

• Shift at least one PD event per term into a job-embedded, classroom-based cycle.

3.4 External Networks and Community Collaboration

What it looks like

• The school participates in networks and partnerships that extend learning beyond the building: place-based learning, internships, community projects, regional networks.

Possible indicators

• Documented partnerships that involve co-designed experiences, not just guest speakers.

• Students regularly engage with mentors or experts off-site or virtually.

Sample next steps

• Start asset mapping to identify local partners tied to your existing goals and units.

• Pilot one community-facing project per grade and capture learning for future scaling.

Dimension 4: Collective Leadership

Core idea: Collective Leadership is about who has voice, agency, and decision-making power. It includes student agency, teacher leadership, and distributed leadership structures that make it possible for people closest to students to shape the system.

4.1 Trust, Respect, and Transparency

What it looks like

• The school actively builds a collegial climate of mutual trust and respect among all stakeholders.

• Conflicts and tensions are surfaced and addressed openly rather than hidden.

Possible indicators

• Climate surveys show high levels of trust and psychological safety.

• Evidence of transparent communication about decisions, including rationale and next steps.

Sample next steps

• Use simple feedback loops (e.g. “fist to five,” quick surveys) to check trust and clarity after major decisions.

• Model transparent decision-making in leadership meetings and share that process with staff.

4.2 Student Voice, Choice, and Co-Design

What it looks like

• Student agency is a core value, not a slogan: students help shape policies, projects, and learning experiences.

• Structures move beyond tokenism to authentic co-design.

Possible indicators

• Students serve on meaningful committees (e.g. schedule, climate, curriculum) with real influence.

• Examples of lessons, projects, or policies that were co-created with students.

Sample next steps

• Pilot a student design team on one concrete problem (e.g. redesigning advisory, improving transitions).

• Introduce student-led walkthroughs or empathy interviews as part of improvement efforts.

4.3 Teacher Leadership and Alternative Pathways

What it looks like

• Teachers have multiple avenues to lead without leaving the classroom: coaching roles, design teams, project leads, community liaisons.

• Professional Learning Communities become platforms for distributed leadership.

Possible indicators

• Clear, documented teacher leadership roles aligned with school goals.

• Teacher feedback showing increased sense of ownership and influence.

Sample next steps

• Map existing informal leadership and formalize a few roles with time, support, and clarity.

• Use PLCs as incubators for teacher-led improvement projects.

4.4 Open Idea Pathways and Merit-Based Implementation

What it looks like

• Systems exist so that anyone - students, staff, families - can propose ideas for improvement in a psychologically safe way.

• Ideas are considered on their merit and alignment with mission, not on rank or position.

Possible indicators

• Documented idea submission and feedback processes.

• Examples of student or staff ideas that moved into pilots or scaled practice.

Sample next steps

• Create a simple innovation pipeline (e.g. idea form + small seed-fund PDSA cycles).

• Share regular updates on which ideas are being tested and what has been learned.

Dimension 5: Living Mission & Vision

Core idea: A Living Mission & Vision is about whether your “why” is co-created, clearly understood, and visible in daily decisions. It connects moral purpose, equity, and the realities of a rapidly changing world to classroom and school practices.

5.1 Co-Created and Widely Known Mission & Vision

What it looks like

• The school/district’s mission and vision were developed with students, families, and staff - and are periodically revisited through an empathy lens, especially with voices not usually at the table.

• Stakeholders can articulate the mission in their own words.

Possible indicators

• Evidence of inclusive processes used to create or revise mission/vision (listening sessions, student focus groups, community events).

• Survey or interview data showing that students and families know the school’s “why.”

Sample next steps

• Use an empathy-based protocol (e.g. “Back to the Future,” empathy maps) to gather perspectives before revising mission/vision.

• Invite students to create artifacts (videos, murals, podcasts) that interpret the mission in their own language.

5.2 Mission & Vision Aligned to Equity and Whole-Child Goals

What it looks like

• The mission explicitly embraces equity, whole-child development, and preparation for a rapidly changing world.

• These commitments show up in resource allocation, policies, and daily practice.

Possible indicators

• Budget and time allocations that reflect mission priorities (e.g. SEL, advisory, experiential learning).

• Regular review of data disaggregated by subgroups to see whether mission promises are being kept.

Sample next steps

• Conduct a “mission audit” of current initiatives: which clearly align, which are off-mission, and which gaps exist.

• Embed mission/vision language into staff evaluation, goal-setting, and improvement plans.

5.3 Brand, Story, and Feedback Loops

What it looks like

• The school/district’s brand - how it’s known in the community - matches its mission and values.

• Student voice and stakeholder feedback are used to continually calibrate and refresh the mission and vision over time.

Possible indicators

• Consistent external messaging (website, events, communications) aligned to the mission.

• Structured feedback cycles (e.g. “shadow a student,” surveys, empathy interviews) used to test whether daily experiences match the stated vision.

Sample next steps

• Invite students and families to “brand audit” the school’s communications and offer redesign ideas.

• Establish an annual “mission check-in” that uses student shadowing and feedback to see what’s actually happening.

Closing Notes: Using the Model as an Evergreen Guide to Continuous Improvement

This version of the OWL Maturity Model for Learner-Centered Innovation is meant to be a living guide, not a static checklist. It should evolve as your school tests new ideas, learns from students and community partners, and documents bright spots and proof points.

A few practical ways to keep it alive:

• Treat each dimension as a design space: use Design Thinking and Improvement Science to prototype, test, and refine practices rather than attempting wholesale change all at once.

• Use the rubric when you need structure for self-assessment and prioritization.

• Use the cards when you want a tactile, conversational way to shuffle, cluster, and storyboard possibilities with students and adults.

• Use this narrative guide when you need examples, indicators, and language that help teams move from an “interesting idea” to concrete tests of change.

Over time, as you return to this model during planning cycles, data reviews, and design sessions, your own stories, artifacts, and refinements should be layered into it so that it becomes less a generic OWL tool and more your community’s shared playbook for learner-centered innovation. Used this way, the model does more than organize an annual school improvement plan - it normalizes ongoing inquiry, empathy, experimentation, and reflection as part of an authentic growth mindset for how your school or district operates and improves every day. In the process, it helps create the conditions for becoming an authentic learning organization, where people continually learn together, adapt practice, and redesign the system in service of students.