Colorado Springs Pilot Links Deeper Learning Model to Higher ELA and Math Scores

A pilot study conducted in partnership between Instructional Empowerment and Colorado Springs School District 11 found that students whose teachers were verified in a 'Model of Instruction for Deeper Learning' scored significantly higher in both English language arts and mathematics on district assessments during the 2025–2026 school year.

By Where Should I Learn Editorial · 2026-09-27

Instructional Empowerment has announced results from a pilot study in Colorado Springs suggesting that a specific deeper learning instructional model was associated with higher student performance in both English language arts and mathematics. The Applied Research Center at Instructional Empowerment partnered with Colorado Springs School District 11 and analyzed district assessment data from the 2025–2026 school year to reach the findings.

According to the announcement, students taught by teachers who had been verified in the Model of Instruction for Deeper Learning scored significantly higher than matched comparison students in the same grade level using the same curriculum within the same district. The study compares cohorts inside a single district rather than across districts, and it relies on locally administered assessments for measurement.

The organizations describe the study as a pilot and say it used a matched comparison approach. That design attempts to control for grade-level and curricular differences by comparing students in similar instructional contexts, but the release does not include detailed methodological information such as the variables used for matching, sample sizes, or the statistical thresholds that produced the word 'significant.'

Instructional Empowerment’s Applied Research Center is credited with conducting the analysis in partnership with District 11. The announcement does not provide the underlying dataset, full statistical outputs, or a peer-reviewed report, so readers should treat the published conclusion as an initial finding rather than definitive proof of causal impact.

The Model of Instruction for Deeper Learning referenced in the study is positioned as an instructional approach; the release indicates that teachers can be verified in the model, and that verified teachers’ students demonstrated the reported gains. The announcement does not include the verification criteria or the length and content of the professional learning that teachers received prior to verification.

Deeper learning is commonly described in education literature as an emphasis on higher-order thinking, collaboration, and application of skills to complex tasks. Proponents argue such instruction can benefit outcomes across subjects because it focuses on transferable cognitive and metacognitive skills. The pilot’s association between deeper learning verification and higher scores in both ELA and math aligns broadly with those theoretical claims, though the release stops short of documenting causal mechanisms.

Important limitations accompany the finding. The study covers a single school district and a single academic year, which limits generalizability. The use of district assessments means results may not be directly comparable to statewide or national measures. Because the source material is a press release from an organization promoting the instructional model, independent replication and transparent publication of methods would strengthen confidence in the result.

For district leaders and school boards weighing instructional investments, the pilot adds a preliminary signal that targeted teacher development tied to a deeper learning model may relate to measurable improvements on local assessments. At the same time, educators should demand clarity about the verification process, the teacher supports provided, and evidence that gains persist over time and across varied student populations.

Researchers and practitioners interested in the model will likely want to see additional documentation: sample sizes, demographic breakdowns, the matching algorithm, pre-post measures, and whether the study accounted for factors such as prior achievement, classroom composition, or school-level interventions. Such details would make it easier to assess the robustness of the reported differences and to design rigorous replication studies.

The Instructional Empowerment announcement contributes to ongoing conversations about how professional learning and instructional models intersect with measurable student outcomes. The pilot in District 11 presents an internally consistent example where teacher verification in a particular model coincides with higher assessment results, but policymakers and educators should treat it as a starting point. Broader adoption would be prudent only after additional, transparent research and replication across contexts confirm the findings and clarify how implementation supports translate into student learning gains.