JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 21, NO. 6, PP. 563-574 (1984)

CASE STUDY OF AN INNOVATION REQUIRING TEACHERS TO CHANGE ROLES

BARBARA S . SPECTOR

Florida International University, Bay Vista Campus AC-I, 371-A, School o f Education, North Miami, FIork2a 331 81

Abstract

An exploratory study which focused on teachers responses to the demand for role change brought about by the implementation of a new course is reported. Two procedures used to gather data were participant observation and open-ended interviews. Role theory, symbolic interaction, and schools as organizations were used as the frameworks for data analysis in this discursive qualitative study. The data reported describe the teachers’ perceptions of factors in- fluencing their willingness to change behaviors in order to comply with the role demands of the innovation. Hypotheses grounded in the data were generated and tied together into a theory which is illustrated by a structural model. The model shows interrelationships of factors influ- encing the teachers to change roles at the time of initiation of the new course through the ultimate incorporation of the innovation.

This is a report of an exploratory study focused on teachers’ responses to the demand for role change brought about by the implementation of a new course. The purpose of the study was to understand the factors which influenced the teachers’ behaviors during the implementa- tion, and to develop a structural model showing the interrelationships of these factors.

The qualitative research method used was described by Glaser and Strauss (1967). In this method the data gathered direct the design of each step of the study as it evolves. The categories, themes, and subsequent hypotheses that emerge are “grounded” (have their initial foundation) in the data themselves. The outcome of this research method is the generation of hypotheses which are eventually tied together in theory. Two procedures used to gather the data were participant observation and open-ended interviews.

Role theory and symbolic interaction were the theoretical bases for the study. Role theory assumes that organizational or societal expectations control the actions of individuals in a given position in much the same way as the “script controls the performance of actors in a given role. This contrasts with the personality-theory assumption that an individual‘s behavior can be accounted for by his/her personal characteristics’’ (Guskin & Guskin, 1970, p. 1). Symbolic interaction is the theoretical basis for the phenomenological approach which was central to this study. Symbolic interaction suggests that to understand the workings of a group or organization, such as a science classroom, we must also understand how the people in the group defrne their world. The imaginations people have of each other, themselves, and every aspect of their world are the solid facts of society. Each person selectively perceives, interprets, and places meaning

@ 1984 by the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/84/060563-12$04.00

564 SPECTOR

upon his/her world and then acts accordingly. People respond to their perceptions of reality, not to some objective reality.

Therefore, in order to fmd out what happens to a teacher when placed in a situation that demands a role change, one needs to identify the role changes and the effect these role changes have as perceived by the teacher.

Method

Data Sources

The data sources were teachers and their school settings. Five high school teachers who were the initial implementors of an audio-tutorial freshman college biology course introduced into five high schools were studied. In this report they are named Bill, Joan, Kim, Sven, and Tim. These “teachers volunteered for the program and they were approved by the school prin- cipal, the project.. .administration, and the university course professor. All teachers were experienced and had strong content backgrounds” (Druger & Spector, 1979). Data on the implementation were gathered from each teacher during a week-long workshop via ongoing open-ended interviews. This was followed by three succeeding interviews with each teacher and three full day site visits.

During the workshop, the researcher kept a low profile while participating in the training activities with the teachers. Input to group discussions was usually limited to comments in- tended to elicit data by causing additional perspectives to surface. On the site visits, the re- searcher “shadowed” the teacher most of the day. Occasionally, the researcher walked through- out the building stopping to listen to discussions in the halls, cafeteria, office, and teachers’ lounge, sometimes raising what school inhabitants perceived as casual sociable questions.

The teachers in this pilot were each working in the same system (the school) and subsystem (the department) in which they had several years of experience. Three-fourths of the teacher’s professional day remained as it had been previously. One-quarter of his/her professional day underwent considerable alteration. This change in structure from the typical high school biology course to an atypical college biology course necessitated changes in many of the teachers’ behaviors. The primary differences between the high school biology course these teachers dealt with most of the day and the new course are highlighted in Figure 1.

In the new course the teacher was interacting with a group 30% of the assigned innovation time. Students worked individually the remainder of the time. This was in contrast to the high school course in which the teacher was in contact with the entire class as a group 100% of the assigned time.

In the high school class the teacher-student ratio was approximately 1/30 all the time. In the audio-tutorial class, 30% of the time the ratio was approximately 1/20, but during 70% of the time there was a variation in teacher-student ratio from 1/20 to no interaction.

The substance of the teacher-student interaction changed substantially. In the high school class the majority of the teacher’s time was used to introduce new content and provide varied explanations, while a minority of the time was devoted to asking and answering questions. The word lecture was used loosely to approximate this traditional exposition type teacher behavior. In the new course the majority of the time was devoted to providing materials and responding to student initiated questions and comments resulting in one to one discussions, with lecture only one hour per week and a one hour group discussion each week.

Procedure

After each site visit and teacher interview, the issues raised were noted by the interviewer and referred to during the interviews with succeeding teachers. Thus, as the interviews accumu-

ROLE CHANGES FOR TEACHERS 565

- TYPICAL HIGH SCHOOL BIOLOGY COURSE INNOVATION - (COLLEGE AUDIO-TUTORIAL BIOLOGY COURSE

CLASSIC SCHEWLE NEW SCHEDULE NEEDED

GROUP OR1 ENTED MX GROUP ORIENTED; 701 INDIVIDUAL ORIENTED

IS NOT DEPENDENT ON MEDIA AND EQUIPMENT

TEACHER LECTURE AND DISCUSSION MOST OF THE TIME

70% AUDIO-TUTORIAL - MEDIA DEPENDENT -

TEACHER LECTURE AND DISCUSSION - 2 HOURS~WEEK

EQUIPMENT DEPENDENT

TEACHER GROUP PACED STUDENT SELF-PACED

ACCOUNTABLE TO HIGH SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, ACCOUNTABLE TO SAME ROLE SET PLUS PARENTS, AND STUDENTS UNIVERSITY PERSONNEL - AN ADDIT IONAL AGENCY

F I N A L EXAM IS STANDARDIZED STATEWIDE NO F I N A L EXAM; SUM OF S I X INTERIM EXAMS USED

- TARGET POPULATlON I S HETEROGENEOUS TARGET POPULATION IS MORE HOMOGENEOUS

TEACHER DECIDES INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS TO USE INSTRUCTIONAL METHOD PRESCRIBED, I ,E., A-T,

TEACHER DECIDES ON STUDENT A C T I V I T I E S STUDENT A C T I V I T I E S DICTATED BY UNIVERSITY

LECTURE 1 HR,, ETC

TEACHER DECIDES EVALUATION TOOLS AND CRITERIA EVALUATION TOOLS AND CRITERIA FOR 70% OF COURSE IS PRESCRIBED

TEACHER DETERMINED RECORD KEEPING UNIVERSITY DICTATED RECORD KEEPING

PROXIMITY FOR STUDENT-STUDENT INTERACTION 30X PROXIMITY FOR STUDENT-STUDENT INTERACTION

TEACHER PRESENT A L L THE T IME STUDENT IS ASSIGNED

TEACHER MAY NOT BE PRESENT A L L THE T IME STUDENT IS ASSIGNED

TEACHER-STUDENT GROUP INTERACTION MOST OF T I M E TEACHER-STUDENT GROUP INTERACTION 30% TIME

TEACHER HAS F L E X I B I L I T Y TO USE AVAILABLE SPECIF IED LABORATORY MATERIALS NEEDED AT LABORATORY MATERIALS AT CONVENIENT TIMES INDICATED T IME

TEACHER GIVES INFORMATION TAPES GIVE INFORMATION

Fig. 1 . Primary differences between high school biology and the innovation.

lated, some structure emerged to the extent that items raised by preceding people were focused on deliberately, for comparison of the other respondents’ perceptions of the same issues. There was constant comparison and analyzing of perceptions from one respondent to the next within a single round of interviews.

In addition, the interview from each teacher was searched within itself for consistencies. As these rounds of interviews took place over a six month time span, changes in each person brought about by time and increased experience with the program were noted.

Following the second round of interviews, all the data were examined for emerging cate- gories. Questions were designed to enhance the categories and stimulate the emergence of re- lated categories in the succeeding round of inerviews. The same process (identification, categori- zation, and comparison) was repeated after the third and fourth rounds.

At the point where respondents comments revealed a specific trend or theme, comments and questions were deliberately designed to search for contradictions. The interviewer tried to provoke an alternative analysis to test the emerging themes. An attempt was made to talk the subject out of the view being voiced. This was intended to give the subject an opportunity and the stimulus to reveal other information. Questions that seemed to come from an entirely different direction and addressed a different topic were raised. When the subject’s answer re- vealed the same information; i.e., the reason for behavior A was the same reason given for be- havior €3, and the newly acquired data in an interview expressed itself as a repeat of the data acquired previously, the category was considered to be saturated. Thus, analytical induction and theoretical saturation were used as the measure of adequate sampling for an issue.

Prior to the final interview, categories of data were summarized on a chart which was pre- sented to each subject. Respondents were asked to comment on the categories listed, in relation to their own teaching experiences with this innovation incorporated into their day.

566 SPECTOR

During the interim between rounds of interviews, the emerging hypotheses gleaned from in- sights into the data were presented to teachers other than the respondents in the project. The teachers were asked for openended comments about the statements. Some of these people were in the same systems as the initial respondents. Some were from other systems across New York state. Each hypothesis was shared with from two to thirty other teachers. Those state- ments with which these teachers could identify from their own experiences were kept, explored further with the project teachers, and used to evolve the theoretical model in this report.

Analysis

Specific perspectives on change, teaching, institutional setting, and the change agent emerged from the data in this project. Their significance was reinforced by the other teachers noted above. All these perspectives continued to be functionally interactive throughout the implementation. Hypotheses about each perspective and the data in which they are grounded are discussed below.

Change

To the extent the teachers held the perspective that change was inherently good, they were willing to change to initiate the new curriculum. This perspective assumes that change is essen- tial to achieve personal growth and is a means to express creativity. It implies that both growth and creativity bring a teacher personal satisfaction in and of themselves, and that both are in- dicators of a successful teacher. Conversely, lack of change leads to boredom, a negative experi- ence, and stagnation, indicators of an unsuccessful teacher.

All five subjects expressed this perspective, but Joan was much less emphatic about it than were the others. This mirrored the varying degrees of willingness to experiment with behavioral changes needed to initiate and facilitate the new curriculum.

Kim, Tim, Bill, and Sven vehemently expressed the view that change was good. Personal growth was highly valued by them. Kim’s comment typifies this perspective, “I think I would have left teaching a long time ago if I had to be teaching the same way I did last year or the year before. I like change. I just hate to do the same thing all the time!” Joan also said she valued personal growth. “I needed to learn additional things. . . And I like being forced into a learning situation.’’ However, change appeared to be of minimal priority to Joan when it entailed much expenditure of time and effort. Kim expressed a tremendous desire to have a continuous outlet in teaching for her creativity. In contrast, Joan expressed no such interest.

These teachers, and others in their buildings, tended to tie growth and creativity together. They noted growth was commonly expressed through teacher initiated variations, changes in teacher behaviors and/or new materials, and activities for students. The introduction of these variations in behaviors, materials, and activities which are new to a teacher and/or class was commonly described by teachers as being creative. This label was used regardless of whether the teacher designed and developed the new ideas or used things with commerrid or other origin. The underlying message seemed to be that the person who evidenced the greatest creativity was the best teacher.

Tlus perspective, that change results in personal growth, is expressed via creativity, leads to a successful teacher, and, thereby, brings personal satisfaction, was a major contributing factor to the degree of willingness to change behaviors which each teacher exhibited at the initiation of the innovation.

ROLE CHANGES FOR TEACHERS 561

Teacher

To the extent the person approached teaching from the perspective of teaching as a secure job which takes little effort because it was expected to be repetitive, little willingness to change behaviors to facilitate an innovation was exhibited by the person. Joan held this perspective. She expected the job to get easier as the years passed. She verbalized her expectation that the longer she taught the less work it would be. The introduction of the new program eliminated the noeffort repetitive aspect of her teaching and demanded more effort and work. She re- marked, “Whereas my day to day teaching is something. . .I do more automatically, this I do have to think about.” The introduction of the innovation was incongruent with her perspective on teaching. The others in this pilot perceived teaching differently. Joan was the most resistant to changing her behaviors.

Conversely, to the extent that persons approached teaching from the perspective of teach- ing as a dynamic job, requiring much effort because it was desirable for it to keep changing, they were willing to change behaviors. Teachers with this perspective expected the job to remain demanding regardless of how long they taught. The introduction of a new program which required more effort and work was congruent with this perspective. Kim, Tim, Bill, and Sven held this perspective. Kim commented, “I can do it. No problem. . .I’m here at quarter of seven every morning. Everything is set up.”

AU the teachers except Joan defined repetition in teaching as boring. As such it proved stressful. Joan defined repetition as relieving the stress of having to work more. She derived comfort from teaching being easier. Thus, the way these teachers perceived the job of teacher influenced their initial willingness to change in implementing the new curriculum and continued to reveal itself throughout the implementation.

Institutional Setting

To the extent the teachers perceived their institutional settings to have encouraged pre- vious innovations, they were willing to change behaviors to facilitate an innovation. The elements that follow contributed to the teachers’ perceptions of their schools as being positive settings for innovation:

(1) The school or department had good experiences with other innovative projects. Two things that influenced the perceptions that the school had good experiences with other innova- tions were: (a) the teachers felt rewarded by the past innovations, and (b) the students had success participating in past innovations. Where the prospective innovation would enhance the positive aspects of familiar courses with which students had been satisfied, both students and teachers were receptive to it. Their receptivity enhanced the teacher’s perception that the school was a positive setting for innovation.

(2) Preexisting norms within the departments were supportive of change in that: (a) experi- mentation with methods and materials were routine; (b) participants in the system were emo- tionally supportive of the individual involved in an innovation; and (c) it was all right for an innovation to fail as long as one gave his/her best effort to facilitate it.

For the most part, the teachers perceived these aspects of their institutional settings to be positive and that encouraged them to be willing to change to initiate the innovation. For example:

In Bill’s school numerous college courses had been introduced to various departments in recent years, including some from the same source as the pilot project innovation. In his science department, the members had been involved with several highly successful in-house and outside

568 SPECTOR

innovations over the years. They did not have an offering in advanced biology. The students had good experiences in other disciplines with innovative courses from this source. When biology was introduced as an innovation, both faculty and students viewed it optimistically.

In schools where this college biology replaced another advanced biology program that had a good reputation among the students and faculty (Kim, Tim, and Joan’s schools), the students readily signed up for the course.

Tim’s school had introduced many college courses in recent years. His own innovative prac- tice of teaching Regents Biology with an audio-tutorial approach was implemented a few years before with much success, The new curriculum replaced a previously well received biology course from another institution. This new curriculum had the advantage to students of giving college credits at a lesser cost and more widely accepted transfer credit than its predecessor. The advantage to the faculty was the employment of one of their own staff to teach it, instead of an outside college teacher. In addition, the course was audio-tutorial. This new project was well accepted with high expectations of success by adults and teenagers.

Kim had designed an advanced biology course of her own two years earlier. She and the students were highly pleased with it. She envisioned the new option to be advantageous to the students, in that it gave college credit, and to herself, in that it provided a large collection of field-tested materials. She and her students embarked on the new course with great enthusiasm. As their positive expectations were justified, the rewards sustained their enthusiasm throughout the program.

In Joan’s school, the innovation replaced a local advanced biology program that had long standing success. Students were primed to expect a positive experience with the new course.

Sven’s school had a history of college credit courses and local college level courses. In biol- ogy he and his students had good experiences with his Anatomy and Physiology course and A.P. Biology. The new curriculum was seen as another option. All anticipated a good experience commensurate with their conditioning from other courses.

Kim perceived her department to have exhibited all the norms that are supportive of change. Bill perceived a similar situation in his department. It was enhanced further by a clear sense of the necessity of the course by all members of his role set. Seven perceived the norms stated earlier to exist, but their effect was lessened by his role as department chairperson. He perceived himself to be somewhat isolated from the support of others. As chairperson, what support he received came directly from the principal who was not in continuous contact with him. Tim perceived his department norms to be slightly less than ideal in that an innovation mandated by the administration, as was this biology curriculum, did not have the option to fail. Joan perceived statusquo to be the norm in her building. She perceived herself to be essentially alone and unsupported once the innovation began. These aspects of her institutional setting seemingly made her less willing to change with the initiation of the new curriculum than were the other teachers.

Change Agent

All the subjects perceived the developer of the innovation, and primary change agent in- volved, to be highly competent and of great professional stature. His expertise as an educator was considered worthy of emulation. Tim had made tapes for an audio-tutorial course but readily acknowledged the developer as “. . .better than I am. I wish I was that good, creative, etc. The tapes are about 500% better than the ones I made.” These high school teachers and the members of their role sets felt that college courses were more prestigious than high school courses. All these things contributed to the status of the innovation and increased the teacher’s willingness to initiate the program.

ROLE CHANGES FOR TEACHERS 569

The teacher’s perception of the change agent affected the teacher’s willingness to change during all three phases of the innovation, but was most dominant during initiation. The long range effect of this phase was hypothesized by Berman and Pauly (1975): “We hypothesized that the support and commitments made in the initiation period affect what happens when project implementation begins” (p. 38). The data in this study suggest that this statement should be expanded to include the hypothesis that the intensity of the commitments made during the initiation phase are influenced by the perceptions the clients hold of the change agent. To the extent that the following perceptions were held, the willingness to make the initial commitment was enhanced: (1) the source, i.e., the University, of the innovation was highly respected, (2) the innovation had prestige in the eyes of the members of the recipient system, (3) the change agent was highly credible, and (4) the change agent was well respected.

During the implementation phase, the extent to which the change agent was trusted and perceived to be in a helping relationship rather than in an evaluative capacity influenced the ease with which the role change occurred. The change agent was seen to be in a helping relation- ship by Kim, Tim, Bill, and Sven, and to a lesser extent by Joan.

The relationship between the change agent and the person to be changed was one of status emulation in this pragram. This was helpful in effecting the changes. Tim had admired the change agent for many years and derived satisfaction from emdating him.

Thus, the perspectives the teachers held on the change agent, the institutional setting, teaching, and change, derived from their past experiences, influenced their willingness to initiate the new curriculum.

Past Experiences

The data imply that to the extent a person’s past experiences have been satisfying, the person will anticipate future satisfaction and is, therefore, willing to try new behaviors during the initiation phase of an innovation.

The teachers discussed this issue directly. They all concurred that their own experience, and that of their colleagues, indicated that the person who would be most willing to test new behaviors was one who felt teaching was rewarding and was very satisfied with teaching as a job. The person who had previously found teaching to be dissatisfying was not likely to change. They reasoned that a person would not be willing to do more work or expend time, energy, and thought toward something that had already proved to be dissatisfying. The person who was satisfied before would expect that the increased work which is needed to change would then lead to an increase in success and satisfaction.

They noted one exception. If the person’s dissatisfaction had been caused by constraints prohibiting new behaviors, that person would be glad to have the opportunity to experiment with new behaviors and would be eager to change in response to the demands of the innovation.

Four of the five subjects were enthusiastic about the intense degree of satisfaction they had derived from their teaching careers. They perceived the innovation as an opportunity to increase their rewards. The fifth subject, Joan, expressed her satisfaction more as a practical comfortable way to earn a living, then as a zest for teaching. At initiation, she perceived the new curriculum as a probable source of much added work which would be a source of great dissatisfaction. The impetus for her to be willing to undertake the new course was that she would avoid teaching a general biology course which she had found to be extremely unsatisfying. She perceived the new course to be the lesser of the two evils. In the sense that she was able to avoid general biology, she was successful with her experimental behaviors and derived personal satisfaction.

At the outset Joan was much more resistant to making changes to facilitate the innovation than the others. As time progressed and she experienced some success from student perform-

570 SPECTOR

ance, she was slightly less resistant. During the course of this study, she never reached a level one could describe as being happily willing to change. This affected her throughout the imple- mentation and seemed to contribute in large measure to her being the least successful, least enthusiastic, and least satisfied of the five subjects. Thus, her past teaching experiences influ- enced her willingness to facilitate the innovation by encouraging resistance at initiation and throughout implementation. This generated a less enthusiastic reaction to the new curriculum on the part of her students.

A dimension of the other four subjects’ past experience that influenced their willingness to change at the time of initiation was the amount of success they had derived from making changes in the past. To the extent that they had been in the habit of voluntarily experimenting with new methodology and/or developing and implementing innovations of their own, they per- ceived themselves as successful. This perception of themselves as successful innovators and people able to handle varied procedures contributed to their willingness to explore new be- haviors. This was extrapolated to the curriculum and provided the expectation that they would be equally as successful with this innovation.

The axiom “success breeds success” was applicable to these teachers. Those who defined themselves as successful viewed their professional behaviors as effective for accomplishing the goals they valued. They projected little likelihood of failure as a teacher in the new course. On a continuum (Kim, Tim, Bill, Sven, Joan), Kim was the most confident and most willing to change. She was constantly experimenting with methodology and design and implementation of curriculum. Toward the opposite end of the continuum, Sven had developed his own curriculum but had not experimented with varied teaching techniques. He mildly questioned his probability for success with the new curriculum. Joan, who had no voluntary experience with new methods or curriculum development, seriously questioned her own capacity to perform new behaviors and be successful with this innovation. Joan, having a less positive perception of herself as a competent, versatile teacher, tended to anticipate a greater likelihood of failure with this inno- vation than did the others. Since she viewed this innovation as increasing the possibility of failure, she was, therefore, less willing to experiment with new behaviors demanded by the innovation initially and throughout implementation.

Experimental Behaviors

Each teacher selected behaviors to try from those required to implement the new course. To the extent that the innovation permitted the teacher to fulfill hislher own definition of the way a teacher should behave, the congruity of definition encouraged the teacher to engage in more experimental behaviors. Stress and resistance to experiment resulted when required be- haviors were contrary to the person’s definition.

This researcher’s experience as a change agent for a variety of projects suggests that with any innovation it is not unusual to find teachers who define themselves exactly as an innovation demands and teachers with definitions that differ to a greater or lesser degree. The role defini- tions for a teacher expressed by Bill, Tim, Kim, Sven, and Joan were on a continuum beginning with an identical definition (Bill) progressing to an opposing definition (Joan).

For example, Bill’s definition of teacher as a facilitator of activities to guide students who have total responsibility for learning was identical to that demanded by the new audio-tutorial course. He perceived no difference between the behaviors required by the innovation and those he believed fulfilled his role as a teacher. In the new course he felt more successful than ever before. Feedback from administrators about his regular classes was sometimes negative because they perceived too much diverse activity and freedom of movement in the room. Consequently,

ROLE CHANGES FOR TEACHERS 571

Bill was freed from the constraints of his administrators’ definition of the teacher’s role which conflicted with his own.

Sven’s definition of teacher demanded that he be busily engaged with and control the activities of students every moment they were in the room. In the new course students were engaged with the tape recorder, worked independently, and assumed responsibility for their own progress 70% of the time. The teacher’s role was facilitator, tutor, and counselor. Sven felt lonely and useless. Consequently, he interrupted students to ask if they needed help and insisted on personally handing out each laboratory item the student needed instead of leaving them in a central location for students to take as needed. It was only after Sven had evidence of students’ cognitive success from the high grades on the first university examination that he began to test behaviors that relinquished control.

Similarly, Joan felt “guilty from doing nothing” and unsuccessful at her job when students were listening to tapes. She defined all behaviors beyond the exposition of information and “verbal spankings” as necessary evils that took her away from her teaching. Thus, the consider- able time demanded by the new course for other behaviors such as inventory manager, admin- istrator, counselor, etc. were in conflict with her self definition. They were enormously time consuming annoyances to which she had to adjust. She resisted doing them as much as possible because they were a source of dissatisfaction.

Model

The hypotheses which emerged from this study were tied together into a theoretical model which focused on the idea that implementation of innovations in schools requires change in teacher behaviors, and these behavioral changes constitute a role change. Building on role theory, the model posits that a successful innovation depends on the teachers making enough changes in their behaviors so that their role behaviors become congruent with the role demands of the innovation. It further suggests that the dominant force influencing a teacher’s willingness to make the required changes is the degree to which a teacher perceives the potential for deriv- ing personal satisfaction from responding to the role demands of the innovation.

The model incorporates the major factors, and connections between factors, which seemed to influence the behaviors of the project teachers as they coped with the demands of the new course. During the initiation phase of the innovation the teachers’ past experiences dictated their perspective on change, teaching, the institutional setting, and the change agent.

To the extent that the teachers held positive perspectives on each of these, they were will- ing to test new behaviors. (See Fig. 2.)

The teacher’s decision about which new behaviors would be tested and to what degree the new behaviors would be tested to comply with the demands of the innovation were influenced by the degree of congruence which existed between the person’s definition of the role of teacher and the role required by the innovation.

The degree to which teachers would continue to test new behaviors would be influenced by the degree to which they perceived the new behaviors to have been successful and to have re- sulted in gratification and a sense of personal satisfaction.

There was a complex interaction of sources influencing each teacher’s perception of success, the degree of satisfaction achieved, and eventual desire to incorporate the innovation perma- nently. These sources of perceived success and personal satisfaction were: student success, per- ception of success by others, status assigned, and role related interactions (teacher-administrator, teacher-student, teacher-change agent). (See Fig. 3.)

Once the teachers were wdling to make some of the changes demanded by the innovation, a cycle began in which experimental behaviors were reinforced and their repetition encouraged;

512

Student Success Achievement Satisfaction

SPECTOR

I I

I I I I

I Perceptions of Priority I Succeu by for Statur I

Others Others

1 THE INITIATION PHASE OF AN INNOVATION: I

I ~ . . .-.

Willingess and psychological readiness to change to embark on new initiatives

to channe something for students.

Fig. 2. Theoretical model of factors influencing a teacher’s willingness to embark on a new initiative in teaching class.

a person’s willingness to change and to try additional behaviors was increased; and the person acquired a sense of ownership of the innovation which added to the satisfaction.

Teachers tested additional new behaviors, which led to more satisfaction, and a spiral grew until finally the teachers had tested all the new behaviors necessary to make their total behavior congruent with the role demands of the innovation. At this point the innovation was no longer viewed as new; it had reached incorporation. (See Fig. 4.)

The insights provided by this study and the model generated suggest stpes to take to assist in (1) teacher selection and (2) strategies to guide innovation.

During the initiation phase of an innovation, decision makers could ascertain which teachers would be most receptive to making behavioral changes to meet the demands of an innovation by assessing each candidate’s perspective on change, teaching, institutional setting, and the change agent. Interviews and/or written survey could be used to gather this data.

The design of an implementation strategy could be enhanced by tending to factors influ- encing personal satisfaction experienced by individual teachers participating in an innovation. Specifically, pre-implementation training time could be designed to:

ROLE CHANGES FOR TEACHERS 573

I I I 1 INITIATION IMPLCMENTATKlN INCORPORATION

VASl

I INlElACllON AS IOURCK-

INlTUL . CYCLE SPIRAL

Fig. 4. Theoretical model of factors influencing the success of an innovation.

CYaE - SPIRALS ’ CONTINUES

(1) focus on each individual teacher’s perception of his/her relationships in the school environment ,

(2) help teachers define their own perceptions of their roles as teachers and their percep- tions of the new role@) demanded by an innovation,

(3) help teachers identify the behaviors needed to make role changes required by an innova- tion,

(4) encourage teachers to identify and discuss existing sources of personal satisfaction in teaching and identify ways that these may be maintained, lost, or replaced during implementa- tion of an innovation,

( 5 ) establish the change agent’s professional credibility. During the implementation, a change agent could maximize teacher satisfaction by: (1) reinforcing desired behaviors, (2) giving the teacher nonthreatening feedback, (3) being readily available to enter into a one-to-one relationship delimited by the teacher. In summary, change strategies designed to address the effect of an innovation on a teacher

as seen from the teacher’s own perspective have potential to increase the success of an innova- tion.

References Berman, P., & Pauly, E. W. (1975). Federal programs supporting educational change, Vol.

ZZZ: the process of change. (U.S. Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, R-l589/3HEW) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Druger, M., & Spector, B. S. (1979). Implementation of a college biology course in high school. The American Biology Teacher. 41 , 413-415.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery ofgrounded theory. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.

5 14 SPECTOR

Guskin, A., & Guskin, S. (1970). A socialpsychology of education. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.

Spector, B. S. (1984). Qualitative research: data analysis frameworks generating grounded theory applicable to the crisis in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 21(5), 459-467.

Manuscript accepted February 23,1984