A new report co-authored by Common Group, Siegel Family Endowment and our team, “Hidden Systems: How Administrative Software Impedes Innovative School Models (and What We Can Do About It)”, surfaces a barrier too often overlooked: the software systems quietly stalling school innovation. Student information systems, human resources platforms and other administrative systems weren’t designed for flexible, team-based staffing models — and it’s time we rethink them.
Hidden Systems: How Administrative Software Impedes Innovative School Models (and What We Can Do About It)
Seven years ago, when we began working with schools and communities to redesign school staffing, I assumed the biggest challenges would come from labor contracts or credentialing. But as we’ve moved deeper into this work, building educator teams and designing new ways to group learners across time, space and place, it turns out the real sticking point isn’t policy; it’s software.
Specifically, it’s the underlying administrative infrastructure — student information systems, human capital management systems and master scheduling tools — that were built for “one-teacher, one-classroom” models of staffing schools.
As schools innovate, they’re forced to bend their innovations to fit inflexible systems. They hack schedules, override attendance tracking and manipulate data fields to make new ways of working fit into legacy tools. What should be bold progress often ends up buried in shadow spreadsheets and inelegant workarounds.
“Hidden Systems” explores how we might break that pattern. It offers a vision for modernizing the digital infrastructure that underpins our schools so it doesn’t just support innovation but actively enables it. And, yes, it should also do the basics better: track instructional minutes, take attendance and reflect how learning actually happens.
If we want to scale promising staffing models and other student-centered innovations, we can’t keep relying on software tools designed for the past. This paper lays out a path forward.
