Improving Academic Performance: What Schools Should Fix Before Buying a New Curriculum

When student scores decline or stagnate, the reaction in many schools is swift and predictable.  We need a new curriculum.

It feels logical. If outcomes are not where they should be, the materials must be the issue.  A new program promises alignment, structure, fresh resources, and a reset.

But curriculum overhauls are expensive. They’re also disruptive — requiring months of training, adjustment, and recalibration. And in many cases, they fail to produce the dramatic gains leaders were hoping for.

Not because curriculum doesn’t matter. It absolutely does.

But because improving academic performance is rarely a curriculum problem first. It’s usually a clarity and execution problem.

Before replacing what you have, it’s worth examining how effectively it’s being used.

Why Buying a New Curriculum Feels Like the Answer

There's comfort in a tangible solution. A new curriculum offers something visible. It signals action. It communicates urgency to the community. It gives leaders a concrete step to point to.

But new materials don’t automatically change instruction.

Teachers still need clarity about which skills truly matter, how to determine whether students are mastering them, and what instructional moves to make when understanding is incomplete or just beginning to take shape.

Without that clarity, even the strongest curriculum becomes another binder on a shelf or another digital platform that teachers learn to navigate without fundamentally shifting their practice.

In schools struggling with improving academic performance, the issue is often not that the curriculum is weak. It’s that instructional decisions are inconsistent, skill focus is broad, and support systems lack alignment.

The curriculum becomes the scapegoat for deeper systemic gaps.

What Actually Improves Academic Performance in Schools

If buying something new is not the first lever, what is?

Improving academic performance in schools is usually the result of strengthening a handful of high-leverage practices. These practices are less visible than a new curriculum adoption, but far more powerful.

They require discipline. They require focus. And they require leaders to resist the urge to chase the next initiative.

When strengthened together, these practices create the clarity and consistency that drive measurable gains in academic performance.

These are not quick fixes. They are school improvement strategies that build capacity over time.

Focus on Skills, Not Just Standards

Standards are essential. They provide direction and rigor. But standards alone do not tell teachers what to teach tomorrow.

Students do not struggle with “RL.6.1.” They struggle with identifying implicit claims, tracking cause and effect, or structuring a paragraph with evidence.

When schools commit to improving academic performance, they shift their focus from broad standards to specific, teachable skills. That shift changes the questions teachers ask.

Instead of circling standards language, they begin identifying exactly what is breaking down. Is it analytical reasoning? Fluency? Vocabulary precision? Multi-step problem solving? When the breakdown is named clearly, the response becomes clearer too.

Clarity at the skill level makes instruction more intentional. Coaching conversations become more concrete. Feedback becomes more actionable. Professional learning becomes targeted rather than theoretical.

Improving academic performance begins with defining the skills students must actually be able to demonstrate.

→ If you’re looking to strengthen how instructional expectations are defined and communicated, Crafting Clear Success Criteria: Supporting Targeted Teacher Growth explores how leaders can create clarity without micromanaging instruction.

Data That Leads to Decisions

Many schools are fluent in data analysis but far less fluent in data response.

Meetings are held. Charts are reviewed. Trends are discussed. The language of growth and proficiency fills the room, yet instruction often remains unchanged.

Improving academic performance requires a different posture toward data. Instead of asking only what the results show, leaders and teachers must ask what those results demand. What should instruction do next?

If assessment data does not translate into adjustments in grouping, modeling, questioning, or feedback, it remains informational rather than transformational.

In schools where academic performance improves, data is used to identify a specific skill gap, determine whether that gap reflects a curriculum issue, a lesson design issue, or an immediate instructional need, and plan a response before the next lesson begins. The conversation does not end with analysis. It ends with action.

This is where checks for understanding become powerful. They shift data collection from a periodic event to a daily instructional habit. Teachers gather evidence during instruction and respond in real time, adjusting before misunderstandings solidify.

Academic performance improves when evidence guides teaching rather than simply measuring it.

→ For a deeper look at how to move from data analysis to clear instructional decisions, Using Data to Support Teacher Growth outlines how leaders can connect evidence directly to skill focus, feedback, and daily instructional moves.

Small-Group Instruction That Is Precise, Not Routine

Small groups are one of the most accessible tools for improving academic performance. They require no new materials, no new software, and no adoption cycles.

What they require is precision.

Too often, small groups are built around reading levels, convenience, or static placements. When that happens, group time becomes predictable but not responsive.

High-impact small groups look different. They are anchored in a clearly defined skill need, tightly focused, and structured to allow immediate feedback and adjustment. Groups remain fluid. Students enter when they need support with a specific skill and exit once they demonstrate progress.

This level of responsiveness does not require a new curriculum. It requires leaders to ensure teachers are grouping by skill rather than by label and adjusting instruction based on evidence.

When small groups are used intentionally and built around skill precision, they become one of the most powerful levers for improving academic performance.

→ For a deeper look at what makes small-group instruction truly high-impact, High-Impact Small Group Practices for Reading & Writing breaks down the instructional moves that move groups from busy to breakthrough.

Intervention That Aligns With Core Instruction

Intervention systems are another area where schools often look outward instead of inward.

A new intervention program promises structure and consistency. But when intervention is disconnected from Tier 1 instruction, it creates fragmentation rather than support.

Improving academic performance through intervention depends on alignment. Students should not experience one set of instructional priorities in core classes and an entirely different focus in intervention. The skills targeted during intervention must reinforce and extend what is happening in the classroom.

Effective intervention systems are defined not by the programs they use, but by their clarity. Entry and exit criteria are explicit. The skill focus is precise. Progress monitoring informs instructional adjustments rather than simply documenting growth. Most importantly, intervention expectations mirror classroom expectations so students experience continuity rather than confusion.

When intervention strengthens core instruction instead of competing with it, schools see more consistent gains in academic performance.

→ For a systems-level look at how tiered support structures should function, MTSS Behavior Interventions in Action: What Tiered Behavior Support Looks Like in Schools outlines what strong alignment across tiers actually requires.

Consistent Disciplinary Thinking Across Classrooms

Another overlooked driver of academic performance at the secondary level is disciplinary clarity.

Students are expected to read, analyze, and justify across subjects, yet the thinking demands of each discipline are rarely made explicit. When instruction centers on covering content rather than modeling how experts in that field make sense of information, comprehension weakens.

A math student must justify differently than a science student. A historian reads differently than a literary analyst. Those differences are not intuitive — they must be taught.

Improving academic performance at the secondary level often depends on this cross-curricular clarity.

When students are consistently taught how to think within each discipline, comprehension deepens and academic performance improves across the secondary grades.

→ For a deeper look at how disciplinary literacy strengthens comprehension across content areas, Disciplinary Literacy in Secondary Education: Why Schools Must Go Beyond ELA explains the thinking moves students must be explicitly taught in each subject.

Before You Buy Something New

Curriculum matters. Resources matter. Alignment matters. But before investing in a costly overhaul, leaders should pause and ask a different set of questions.

• Are teachers clear on the specific skills students must master?

• Are we using data to guide daily instructional decisions?

• Are small groups responsive to actual skill gaps?

• Is intervention aligned to core instruction?

• Are we reinforcing shared thinking practices across classrooms?

If the answer to these questions is no, then improving academic performance likely depends less on buying something new and more on strengthening what is already in place.

Sustained improvement in academic performance comes from clarity, precision, and alignment. Most often, it comes from tightening systems rather than replacing them.

In most schools, the tools for improvement are already there.  They simply require sharper focus and stronger execution.

→ If you’re unsure whether your curriculum is the issue or whether implementation is the real gap, Evaluating Curriculum Effectiveness walks through a practical process for making that determination before investing in something new.

👉 Want done-for-you professional development tools to strengthen this work?

Inside the Behind the Desk membership, you’ll find ready-to-use PD slide decks and aligned leadership tools designed to support instructional clarity — plus new time-saving resources each month and a live coaching option.