Journal of Educational Change

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 327–346 | Cite as

Toward an understanding of how teachers change during school reform: Considerations for educational leadership and school improvement

  • Theodore Stefan Kaniuka


As the concept of distributed leadership and its concomitant organizational structures become more prevalent in schools, studying how teacher capacity can be enhanced and can be used as a catalyst for reform is important. This article documents the nature of how the implementation of a research-validated reform influenced what teachers thought about their own teaching, student achievement, and expectations. A case study approach documented the experiences of elementary school teachers in a high poverty, historically low-performing elementary school as they implemented a researched-validated instructional reform targeting the most at-risk students in the school. The teachers experienced significant professional growth that encompassed self-doubt, resistance, acceptance, and finally advocacy. Implications for the practices that define educational leadership and school improvement are discussed in light of how successful reform can improve teacher capacity.


School improvement Teacher change Teacher self-efficacy School leadership 


  1. Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Attard, K. (2007). Habitual practice vs. the struggle for change: Can informal teacher learning promote ongoing change to professional practice? International Studies in Sociology of Education, 17(1/2), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball, D., & Cohen, D. (1996). Reform by the book: What is: Or might be: The role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(6–8), 14.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman & Company.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, N. (2003). Distributed leadership. London: National College for School Leadership.Google Scholar
  6. Check, J. (2002). Reflection and reform. The Quarterly, 24(3), 26–31.Google Scholar
  7. Clark, C., & Peterson, P. (1987). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  8. Crowther, F., Kaagan, S. S., Ferguson, M., & Hann, L. (2002). Developing teacher leaders: How teacher leadership enhances school success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cuban, L. (1988). A fundamental puzzle for school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 341–344.Google Scholar
  10. Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms 1890–1990 (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  11. Curry, M. (2008). Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 733–774.Google Scholar
  12. David, J. (1995–1996). The who, what, and why of site-based management. Educational Leadership, 53(4), 4–9.Google Scholar
  13. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61, 6–11.Google Scholar
  14. DuFour, R. (2011). Work together: But only if you want to. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(5), 57–61.Google Scholar
  15. Elmore, R. (1995). Structural reform and educational practice. Educational Researcher, 24, 23–26.Google Scholar
  16. Elmore, R. (2004). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University press.Google Scholar
  17. Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1991). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. Eugene, OR: ADI Press.Google Scholar
  18. Engelmann, S., Osborn, S., Hanner, S., Carnine, L., Meyer, L., Becker, W., et al. (1989). Corrective reading. Chicago: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
  19. Evans, E. D., & Triblle, M. (1986). Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and commitment to teaching among preservice teacher. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 81–85.Google Scholar
  20. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  21. Goddard, R., LoGerfo, L., & Hoy, W. (2004). High school accountability: The role of perceived collective efficacy. Educational Policy, 18, 403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership. In K. Leithwood, P. Hallinger, K. Seashore-Louis, G. Furman-Brown, P. Gronn, W. Mulford, & K. Riley (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  23. Gronn, P. (2008). The future of distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guskey, T., & Petterson, K. (1995–1996). The road to classroom change. Educational Leadership, 53, 10–15.Google Scholar
  25. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33, 329–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harris, A. (2009). Distributed leadership: Different perspectives. Distributed Leadership Studies in Educational Leadership, 7(Part 5), 241–243. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9737-9_13.Google Scholar
  27. Henson, R. K. (2002). From adolescent angst to adulthood: Substantive implications and measurement dilemmas in the development of teacher efficacy research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Labone, E. (2004). Teacher efficacy: Maturing the construct through research in alternative paradigms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 341–359.Google Scholar
  29. Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  30. Lambert, L. (2002). Developing sustainable leadership capacity in schools and districts. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  31. Lange, J., & Burroughs-Lange, S. (1994). Professional uncertainty and professional growth: A case study of experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(6), 617–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leithwood, K. (2004). Educational leadership. The laboratory for student success. Philadelphia: Temple University.Google Scholar
  33. Leithwood, K. (2005). Teacher working conditions that matter. Toronto: Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario.Google Scholar
  34. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., Earl, L., Watson, N., Levin, B., & Fullan, M. (2003). Leadership for large-scale reform: The case of England’s national literacy and numeracy strategy (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education: unpublished paper).Google Scholar
  35. Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research how leadership influences student learning. Wallace Foundation.Google Scholar
  37. Louis, K., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K., & Anderson, S. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Final report of research findings. Report commissioned by The Wallace Foundation.Google Scholar
  38. Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Google Scholar
  39. Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  40. Mascall, B., Leithwood, K., Strauss, T., & Sackes, R. (2009). The relationship between distributed leadership and teacher’s academic optimism. Distributed Leadership Studies in Educational Leadership, 7(Part 5), 81–100.Google Scholar
  41. Mayrowetz, D. (2008). Making sense of distributed leadership: Exploring the multiple usages of the concept in the field. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(3), 424–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McKeone, D. (1995). Measuring your media profile. Brookfield, VT: Grower.Google Scholar
  43. McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  44. Murphy, C., & Lick, D. (2005). Whole-faculty study groups: Professional learning communities that target student success (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  45. NCLB (2002). No child left behind. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  46. Parise, L., & Spillane, J. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers’ practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Przychodzin-Havis, A., Marchand-Martella, N., Martella, R., Miller, D., Warner, L., Leonard, B., et al. (2005). An analysis of corrective reading. Journal of Direct Instruction, 5, 37–65.Google Scholar
  48. Punch, K. (2009). An introduction research methods in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Rodgers, M., Cross, D., Gresalfi, M., Trauth-Nare, A., & Buck, G. (2010). First year implementation of a project-based learning approach: The need for addressing teachers’ orientations in the era on reform. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi: 10.1007/s10763-010-9248-x.Google Scholar
  50. Ross, J., & Gray, P. (2006). School leadership and student achievement: the mediating effectives of teacher beliefs. Canadian Journal of Education, 29, 798–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sannino, A. (2010). Teachers’ talk of experiencing: Conflict, resistance and agency. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 838–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Snider, V., & Schumitsch, R. (2006). A comparison of teacher attitudes and beliefs about issues in education across conventional and direct instruction schools. Journal of Direct Instruction, 6(1), 17–33.Google Scholar
  53. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teacher and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956.Google Scholar
  55. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk-Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–48.Google Scholar
  56. Turner, J. C., Christensen, A., & Meyer, D. K. (2009). Teachers’ beliefs about student learning and motivation. In L. J. Saha & A. G. Dworkin (Eds.), The new international handbook of teachers and teaching (Vol. 1). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  57. Vitale, M., & Kaniuka, T. (2009). Exploring barriers to the role of corrective reading in systemic school reform: Implications of a three-part investigation. Journal of Direct Instruction, 9(4), 21–36.Google Scholar
  58. Weber, R. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  59. Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wong, Y. L. (1997). Clearing hurdles in teacher adoption and sustained use of research-based instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 482–485. Retrieved October 15, 2002, from Expanded Academic ASAP database.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fayetteville State UniversityFayettevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations