Designing Pilots for Consensus and Future Implementation

The Center for Education Market Dynamics • March 27, 2026

Districts report that they rarely struggle most with choosing instructional materials. They struggle with what happens after the decision is made. A recent EdReports study found that 49 percent of districts report difficulty achieving stakeholder buy-in during curriculum adoption, and 48 percent struggle with implementation. By contrast, only 13 percent report challenges determining needs and 14 percent narrowing options. The biggest barriers are organizational: building shared understanding of strong instruction, developing leadership capacity, and creating conditions for durable teacher ownership.

Laguna Beach Unified School District and Tustin Unified School District designed their recent math pilots with these challenges in mind. In both systems, pilot teams reached near- or full consensus before formal adoption decisions were finalized. That consensus emerged because pilots were built around adult learning, shared criteria, and early implementation planning. Leaders from these districts shared their experience and innovations with OCDE in a recent webinar.

Start With Vision, Then Narrow the Landscape

Dr. Chad Mabery, Assistant Superintendent of Instructional Services in Laguna Beach, described a winnowing process that moved quickly once the district had clarity. Leaders and teachers studied the framework, visited other schools, and defined the competencies and learning experiences they wanted for students. That clarity shaped evaluation criteria and the evidence teachers brought to materials discussions.

Tustin followed the same underlying principle through a different structure. Dr. Maggie Villegas, Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services in Tustin, described how the district built a lab school where teachers implemented problem-based instruction in real classrooms. This gave educators a concrete reference point for what it would take to realize their instructional vision day to day, while also surfacing predictable challenges such as pacing, discourse routines, and planning demands.

As Tustin moved toward selection, piloting teams were active across all elementary schools. Leaders in every instructional role could draw on the lab school experience to ground conversations and analysis.

In both districts, clear instructional visions made it easier to eliminate programs that did not fit, as decisions were anchored in shared expectations rather than individual preferences.

Build Capacity Early and Across Roles

Both districts made deliberate choices to expand learning beyond pilot teachers.

In Laguna Beach, leaders shifted the pilot to the fall and made a decision in December. This reduced pressure and created space in the second half of the year to prepare for broader implementation. Teachers continue using the selected materials through the spring, while the district is organizing opportunities for non-pilot teachers to observe lessons, engage in lesson study, and build familiarity before full implementation in the upcoming school year.

In Tustin, capacity-building was designed as a system-wide effort. The district mapped what teachers, principals, instructional coaches, and district leaders needed to know and be able to do, and they then built structures for learning accordingly.

A key design decision across both districts strengthened both capacity and consensus: requiring intact grade-level teams to pilot together rather than relying on individual volunteers. Teams planned collaboratively, stayed in sync, and created a more coherent student experience. Leaders anticipate that this approach will reduce variation during implementation, as teams will enter the following year with shared experience.

Make Data Part of the Pilot Design

Both districts were intentional about how data functioned during the pilot.

In Laguna Beach, leaders chose to maintain their existing diagnostic assessment rather than adopt a new one aligned to the curriculum. This enabled year-over-year comparisons and reduced anxiety among teachers trying new materials. During the pilot, the district observed stronger growth among pilot teachers, reinforcing that structured planning time, coaching, and collaborative unit unpacking were translating into measurable gains.

Tustin gathered regular feedback from teachers, coaches, and principals to identify successes, understand challenges, and adjust supports. Early on, classrooms were described as “feeling different.” Over time, the district worked to define and measure that difference more precisely. The data showed increasing comfort with new pedagogical approaches and created a detailed record of implementation across units.

Use the Pilot to Stress-Test Implementation Supports

Across both districts, the pilot served as an early signal for implementation planning. Leaders gathered feedback, made adjustments, and iterated on support structures in real time.

In Laguna Beach, planning supports and coaching structures were refined based on pilot experience. The district plans to use pilot classrooms as model sites, with lesson study structures that include previewing lessons, observing instruction, and debriefing with a shared lens.

In Tustin, the lab school surfaced what worked, what created friction, and what teachers needed to sustain strong instruction. These insights are now informing districtwide implementation, including how PLCs will run, how coaching will be structured, and which routines must be protected.

Design Principles for Pilots That Lead to Consensus and Quality Implementation

Laguna Beach’s and Tustin’s successes suggest several design principles for districts seeking to address the buy-in and implementation challenges highlighted in national data:

• Clarify instructional expectations before deep evaluation begins. Shared expectations make winnowing faster and reduce preference-driven debate.
• Build learning structures for teachers, leaders, and coaches. Consensus strengthens when administrators and coaches share the same instructional lens.
• Pilot with grade-level teams to increase coherence. Team-based participation improves collaboration, reduces uneven implementation, and strengthens shared ownership.
• Use timing to create a runway for implementation. Fall pilots and learning labs open space for observation, lesson study, and onboarding.
• Identify and communicate results from pilot data. Identify data that will be used to differentiate products that will be shared with multiple stakeholders throughout decision-making and implementation.
• Capture pilot feedback to inform implementation. Insights should shape PLC routines, coaching models, observation tools, and professional learning plans.

Laguna Beach and Tustin demonstrate what’s possible when districts design pilots around shared learning and implementation readiness. Consensus becomes easier to reach, buy-in extends across multiple roles, and the district is better able to plan for full implementation.