Adopting and implementing a high-quality curriculum can have a huge impact on student learning — but the process has to include a common understanding of and commitment to aligned professional learning. Recently, leaders from the Research Partnership for Professional Learning (RPPL) tackled this opportunity head-on in a new report: Defining Curriculum-Based Professional Learning: Building a Common Language. 

Here’s what co-authors Dr. Stacey Alicea, Executive Director, and Dr. Camea Davis, Director of Equitable Research-Practice Partnerships, have to say about how this resource can help:

Why did you see a need to create a common definition of curriculum-based professional learning (CBPL)?

RPPL: As more districts invest in high-quality instructional materials (HQIM), there’s been a growing push for professional learning (PL) that helps teachers use those materials well. But the field lacked a shared definition of what that should look like. Greater clarity allows us to build aligned systems, design effective supports, and learn about what PL features work best, for whom, and under what conditions. That’s why RPPL, along with Learning Forward, NIRN, Rivet Education, and the Learning Policy Institute, created Defining Curriculum-Based PL: Building a Common Language. It’s meant to give system leaders, PL providers, and funders a clear, practical starting point for what “good” looks like in CBPL—and how to build toward it.

Who are the key audience members for this guide (such as principals, teachers, policymakers), and how do you hope they will receive and utilize this information? 

RPPL: This guide is for anyone designing, delivering, or supporting professional learning—district leaders, school leaders, instructional coaches. For leaders and providers, it offers a set of features and indicators that can guide decisions about program design, partner selection, and resource allocation. For researchers and funders, it helps create alignment across studies and investments. And for educators, it’s a tool to help ask better questions about what supports are actually useful and responsive to their day-to-day instructional work.

Are there any audiences that are often overlooked in this area who need to be engaged? 

RPPL: Teachers are too often left out of conversations about professional learning—even though they’re the ones doing the hard work of translating materials into meaningful instruction. We need to engage them not just as participants, but as co-creators and sources of feedback. Their insight is critical to getting implementation right. When it comes to PL, educators should look for 10 key features:

• Collaborative – Grounded in peer-to-peer work, not one-off workshops.
• Supported by coaching – Ideally job-embedded and responsive to teacher needs.
• Grounded in practice – Directly applicable to classroom work, not abstract theory.
• Intensive and sustained – Not just one session, but ongoing cycles of learning.
• Staged over time – Matches where teachers are in the curriculum rollout.
• Supports instructional adaptation – Helps teachers meet student needs without sacrificing rigor.
• Anchored in a shared vision – Aligns with broader instructional priorities.
• Supports Teachers in Meeting Individual Student Needs – Addresses how to meet diverse student needs intentionally.
• Led by strong leadership – School leaders set the tone and make PL a priority.
• Measured for improvement – Uses data to drive reflection and adjustment.

School leaders are also frequently overlooked, despite being central to setting the conditions that allow high-quality PL to take root—like protecting time for collaboration and ensuring alignment across initiatives. And finally, instructional coaches and support staff play a major role in sustaining day-to-day implementation, and need clear, consistent training tied to the same vision.

How does the model for high-quality professional learning differ across grade spans?

RPPL: The foundational features of strong PL—like being sustained, collaborative, content-specific, and grounded in practice—stay the same across grade levels. But how they show up can vary. For instance, early literacy CBPL may focus on foundational skills and be more tightly structured, while secondary CBPL often requires space for content nuance and subject-specific strategies. Time structures, team configurations, and daily routines also differ between elementary and secondary settings, which affect how PL can be delivered effectively. PL design needs to be responsive to those differences while staying anchored in the same foundational features.

Many of our CurriculumHQ readers are district and state leaders. Zooming out, how can leaders at those levels create the conditions needed for effective, high-quality professional learning and ensure a cohesive instructional vision?

RPPL: One of the biggest barriers to effective PL is fragmentation. Materials, coaching, assessments, and leadership initiatives often move in parallel, but not in sync. Leaders can make a big difference by building coherence across these efforts, grounded in a clear instructional vision. That means investing in HQIM and PL that are aligned, ensuring roles and responsibilities are coordinated, and creating time and systems for continuous improvement. Coaching, leadership development, and measurement strategies all need to reinforce—not compete with—that shared vision. When those pieces are connected, teachers are much more likely to receive the kind of support that actually improves their practice.

Without that, even strong PL won’t have staying power. Leaders can help by prioritizing HQIM, investing in curriculum-aligned PL, and structuring roles, time, and staffing to support ongoing learning. They also need to ensure that coaching, leadership development, and measurement efforts are connected, not siloed. When systems are coherent, PL has a much greater chance of leading to sustained improvement.

District and state leaders can also make sure PL is staged over time. Teachers and PL providers must experience complete implementation cycles and have sustained engagement with PL features over time to make lasting instructional improvements.