The Permanent Importance of the Subjective Reality of Teachers during Educational

Innovation: A Concerns-Based Approach

Author(s): Rudolf van den Berg and Anje Ros
Source: American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Winter, 1999), pp. 879-906
Published by: American Educational Research Association
Stable URL: [Link] .
Accessed: 28/06/2014 15:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
[Link]

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@[Link].

American Educational Research Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to American Educational Research Journal.

[Link]

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 American Educational ResearchJournal
Winter1999, Vol.36, No. 4, pp. 879-906

The Permanent Importance of the Subjective

Reality of Teachers During Educational
Innovation: A Concerns-BasedApproach

Rudolf van den Berg

Universityof Nijmegen and the KPCGroup
Anje Ros
KPCGroup

In thepresent contribution, the question of the conditions under which innova-

tions appear to succeed stands central. Such objectiveconditions as organiza-
tional structure, technologicalpossibilities,and budgetsare clearlyimportantfor
innovations to succeed. Ofparticular interesthere, however,are the concerns of
teachersand the role that theseconcernsplay in the [Link] is
made for increased attention to the individual questions, needs, and opinions
that arise among teachersin responseto innovations. Concernsare presented as
indicators of the subjective realities of teachers and, at times, the expression of
ambivalence with regard to the innovation in question. Aftersketching the rel-
evant theory, we show that increased attention is needed to the involvementof
teachers and, thereby, their concerns with regard to even such recent innova-
tions as adaptive teaching. This need is illustratedon the basis of the research
material we have collected over thepast few years. Thedata show, among other
things, that teachersat differentstages in the innovationprocess expressdifferent
types of concerns. Clear attunement of innovation policy to those (possiblysub-
jective)factors influencing the implementationprocess is thusseen as a necessity.
Among thesefactors are theframework ofphases in the innovation, the scale of
the innovation, the individual orientations of the teachers involved in the inno-
vation, and the match betweenthe orientationsof the teachersand the concerns
elicited by the innovation.

RUDOLF VAN DEN BERG is a Professor of EducationalSciences in the Department of

Education,Universityof Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
His research interests include issues pertainingto educational innovation. He is also ac-
tively involved in various innovation projectsunder the auspices of the National Educa-
tional Centre(KPCGroup)in 's-Hertogenbosch,the Netherlands.
ANJERos is a Researcher/Advisorwith the NationalEducationalCentre(KPCGroup),
's-Hertogenbosch,the Netherlands.

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
n March1969, Frances Fuller published the article "Concernsof Teachers:A
Developmental Conceptualization"in this [Link] was the first discus-
sion of teacher concerns in a [Link] concept of concerns and the
theory around this concept thus emerged in the late 1960s with the pioneering
work of Fullerand her colleagues at the Researchand Development Centerfor
Teacher Education at the Universityof Texas, Austin. Fuller identified and de-
scribed four majorclustersof teacher concerns:unrelated,self, task, and impact.
All of the concerns identified by Fuller pertained to preservice training. Hall,
George, and Rutherford(1977) and Hall and Hord (1987) pursued the pioneer-
ing work of Fuller and went on to identify a set of concerns that appears to
characterizemost innovations and the change process in general.
In the present article (30 years after the publication of Fuller'sarticle),the
concept of concern is considered from an internationalperspective. By concern,
we mean the questions, uncertainties,and possible resistancethat teachers may
have in response to new situations and/or changing demands. Depending on
the types of concerns and their feelings of certainty/uncertainty,teachers may
consider themselves either qualifiedor unqualifiedto implementand institution-
alize innovations. In the present article,those theoreticalperspectives that par-
ticularlyrelate to teacher concerns and uncertaintiesare considered.
Such preconditionsfor reformas the subjectiverealitiesof teachersand their
emotional responses to their workplace conditions are described. In addition,
we consider those concerns that relateto the professionaldevelopment of teach-
ers. In describingthe concerns of teachers, we present the internationallyused
concerns-basedadoption model (CBAM).Then we present a study in which the
various phases of the change process are examined: adoption, implementation
(early and late), and [Link] groups of practitionersrealizinga
specific innovation--namely, adaptiveteaching-are compared. The resultsof a
longitudinalstudy with the participantsfrom one of the three groups are then
presented. The main question behind this longitudinalresearchwas whether or
not teachershave differentattitudestowardan innovationat differentstages in the
implementationof the [Link] how teachers differwith regard
to their concerns, theirworries, and their supportfor innovationswere also con-
[Link] resultsof our cross-sectionaland longitudinalresearchare next linked
to some other aspects of the change process and recent [Link]
then returnto a few of our researchresults and the theoreticalperspectivesthat
appear to be most relevantfor understandingthese specific results.

Background
The DifferingSubjectiveRealitiesof Teachers
The resultsof numerous studies (Fuller,1969;Hall et al., 1977;Richardson,1990)
show the perceptions of those involved in innovations to be of major impor-
tance for the success of the innovation process. Of particularimportanceis the
significance attached to the innovation by those involved in it. In the present
article,greaterattentionto the perceptions of those involved in an innovation is
therefore called for. That is, the course of an innovation process strongly de-
880

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
pends on the experiences, concerns, and skills of the individuals and groups
involved in the process.
The objective characteristicsof an innovation (e.g., policies, cooperative
networks, financial arrangements/regulations)are certainly important for the
successful realizationof the innovation. However, the perceptions of the actors
involved in the innovation and the effects of these perceptions on the school,
class, and group may be even more importantfor the successful realizationof an
innovation. The specific reactions to an innovation and the possible problems
associated with these reactionstypicallystem from the significanceor meanings
that teachers attach to their situation. Many personal factors can shape teacher
concerns: previous experiences, the home situation,personal preferences/styles,
legal/financial security, self-confidence, and so forth. The contributionof such
personal factors also means that teachers can appear to make irrationaldeci-
sions in the eyes of outsiders at times. During the implementationof innova-
tions, it is therefore criticalthat a pictureof teacher concerns be obtained. There
is also, for this reason, increasingnational and internationalinterest in the per-
ceptions and concerns of teachers.
Nias (1996) points to the increasinglypolitical nature of teachers' realities
and theiremotionalresponses to workplaceconditions."Despitethe passion with
which teachershave always talked about theirjobs, there is relativelylittlerecent
researchinto the partplayed by or the significanceof affectivityin teachers'lives,
careers and classroom behavior"(Nias, 1996, p. 293). One cannot help teachers
develop their classroom management skills without addressing their emotional
responses to events aroundthem and the attitudes,values, and beliefs thatunder-
lie these responses. Nias asks why teachershave such a deeply emotionalattach-
ment to theirwork, and three main answers are suggested. First,teaching is a job
that involves interactionsbetween people and thereforehas an inevitablyemo-
[Link],teachersinvesttheir"selves"in theirwork, which means
that the classroomand school become the main sites for the development of self-
esteem and self-fulfillmentalong with a certain degree of [Link],
teachers have profound feelings about theirwork because they invest so heavily
in it and the values they believe it represents.A moralperspectiveon the teacher's
task and thereforetheir "selves"often lies behind teachers'emotional reactionsto
apparentlytrivialincidents (see also Hargreaves,1994).
The attunementof innovation policy to factorsseen by teachers as bearing
directly on the implementationprocess is thus increasinglyseen as a necessity,
with attentionto the concerns of teachers coming to constitutean importantpart
of [Link] fromthe past illustratethis. Cruickshank,
Lorisch,and Thompson (1979) described 15 factors that appear to be of impor-
tance for good [Link] factorswere identifiedon the basis of two
review [Link] to the 15 factors is the attunementof innovation guid-
ance to the particularneeds of teachers. Olson (1980) has extensively studied
the personal experiences of teachers and thereby highlighted the risks associ-
ated with introducingexternally developed innovations for implementationin
local situations. Hatton (1985) describes the adoption and implementation of
innovations as a confrontationbetween two cultures:the culture of the innova-
881

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
tors and the culture of actual practice. Hatton also emphasizes that too little
attentionis generally paid to the teacher culture and pleads for greaterattention
to the manner in which teachers construe their teaching role. In still other re-
search, Rutherfordand Murphy(1985) examined the functioningof 380 teachers
who had worked on a total of 155 innovations over the previous 2 years. Once
again, more positive evaluations of the innovationswere found to be associated
with those innovations in which the teachers were highly involved.
The resultsof studies by Richardson(1990) and Richardson,Anders,Tidwell,
and Lloyd(1991) also emphasize the importanceof attendingto the concerns of
teachers, the experiences that they have had, and the personal biography that
steers their behavior: "The problem is not only of change or non-change. It
centers on the degree to which teachers engage in the dialogue concerning
warrantedpractice and take control of their classroom activitiesand theoretical
justifications"(Richardson,1990, p. 16). Similarinsights have been produced in
comparableEuropeanresearch(Clement,Sleegers,& Vandenberghe,1995). The
question, then, is how supporters, facilitators,and school leaders can identify
and acknowledge the subjective realities of teachers in order to increase the
chances of an innovation succeeding.
The school change literaturegenerally overlooks the necessary conditions
for restructuringand/or reformingteachers'work. The engagement of teachers
in school change is often marginalbecause the reformssimply do not consider
how teachers may perceive their role, the relationsof teachersto others, and the
significance of the change itself for teachers (Gitlin & Margonis,1995, p. 380).
Littleand McLaughlin(1993) employ a culturalanalysis to understandreforms
and stress the importanceof consideringspecific contextualcultures,such as the
functioning of teachers in relation to their departments,during reform efforts.
Engagement, from this perspective, requires understanding of the subjective
realities of teachers. The initial reactions of teachers to a reform should not be
automaticallyviewed as resistance,for example. Time should be spent examin-
ing these reactionsfor positive elements and ideas that may actuallymake good
sense (Gitlin & Margonis,1995, p. 380). Obstructionistacts can play an impor-
tant role in reformeffortseven when they appear to work againstthe innovation
in the short run. And certain fundamentalconcerns must be addressed before
the reform can even be introduced. The persistence of teacher concerns also
means that they should continuallybe taken into consideration.
The Concept of Concern
Concern can be taken as an importantindicator of the subjective reality that
allows teachers to organize and understandtheir daily work and an indicatorof
the subjective reality that motivates people to teach in a particularmanner. In
1981, CBAM,originally developed by Hall et al. (1977), and the concomitant
instrumentswere presented in the Netherlandsand Belgium by van den Berg
and Vandenberghe(1981, 1995). For the Dutch-Belgiansituation, the set of in-
strumentsdeveloped in the United Stateswas not just translatedbut also reas-
sessed and, to an importantextent, adapted, revised, and supplemented (see
Method section). The concept of "concern"refers to the personal experiences
882

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
that teachers have when they are involved in a change. By concern (as already
stated), we mean the questions, uncertainties,and possible resistancethat teach-
ers may have in response to new situations and/or changing demands. The
composite representationof the feelings, preoccupations,thoughts, and consid-
erations related to a particularinnovation is labeled concern. Hall et al. (1977)
describe concern as "anaroused state of personal feelings and thoughts about a
demand as it is perceived"(p. 5).
The Stages of Concern questionnaireis structuredaround three clusters of
concern: self (concerns about personal ability),task (concerns about the perfor-
mance of the task), and other or impact (concerns about cooperation among
colleagues and concerns about the progress and results for students). In the
cluster of self-concern, teachers wonder what the innovation actuallymeans for
them (e.g., "CanI manage this?Am I functioning well enough?").Taskconcern
is related to the possible impact of the innovation on one's tasks (e.g., "Isthe
invested time proportionateto the required results?Are the means needed for
realizationof the innovation lacking?").Otherconcern pertainsto the impact of
the innovation on and functioningof others (colleagues, parents,policy people,
and, naturally,the students themselves) (e.g., "Is it always the same group of
people who participatein an innovation?Whatmore can be asked of the teach-
ers as far as teamwork is concerned?").
InternationalUse
The concerns-based adoption model has received widespread internationaluse.
Hall and Hord (1987) report a body of research based on the CBAM.A good
CBAMvalidity study is that of Hubermanand Miles (1984), who examined the
factorscontributingto successfulimplementationusing the CBAMtools. Huberman
and Miles (1984) also used such a phases of innovation frameworkand identi-
fied three phases of innovation:adoption, early implementation,and laterimple-
mentation. Hubermanand Miles(1984) analyzed 12 sites with regardto the feel-
ings and concerns of teachersduringthe phases of earlyand laterimplementation.
During the early use of the innovations, many of the concerns appeared to be
self-oriented. "Itwas as if the users were so flooded with the difficultexperience
of day-to-day coping that they had little attentionavailable for the problems of
students or another"(Huberman& Miles, 1984, p. 75).
During laterimplementation,concerns about efficientmanagement,student
effects or consequences, collaboration, and refocusing were found to occur.
"Thoughlater implementationwas far smoother than early use, there were still
some virulentbugs, loose ends, structuralincompatibilitieswith existing arrange-
ments, unsuccessful attemptsto resolve many of these difficulties,or new prob-
lems emerging out of the resolution of old ones" (Huberman & Miles, 1984,
p. 119). In other words, these researchersobserved a shift from self-orientedto
practice- or task-orientedconcerns but nevertheless see differenttypes of con-
cerns co-occurringwithin the same researchsite. Theirconclusion is, thus, that a
hierarchical,orderlyprogression of concerns simply does not exist.
Meehan (1987) has collected concerns data in the cognitive and affective
domains for both principalsand teacherson a pretest-posttestbasis in the United

883

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros

States. In the United Kingdom, Hopkins (1990) has studied teacher personality
and school [Link](1991) has applied the CBAMto facilitatethe devel-
opment of teacher assessment. In the Netherlandsand Belgium, several innova-
tion projects have also been analyzed with the CBAMinstruments(van den
Berg, 1993). With regardto the question of whether the interventionsare well
tuned to the concerns of those involved, we have examined many large-scale
innovation projectsin WesternEurope.After3 years of innovation in 40%of the
schools, we still see a very high level of [Link] additionto the Stagesof
Concern questionnaire,a Rasch intensity of concern scale has also been devel-
oped, thereby furtherdocumenting the validity of concern theory. In summary,
the present instrumentationhas been put to use in numerous U.S. states, some
areas of Australia,and a number of Western European countries (the Nether-
lands, Belgium, Germany,and the United Kingdom) (van den Berg, 1993). The
choice of instrumentationis based on the concrete applicabilityfor the study of
diverse innovations and the careful empiricalelaborationof the scales. The in-
strumentis, as a result, quite useful for comparisons of schools with regard to
progress in the realizationof an innovation.
Concerns in Relationto the ProfessionalDevelopment of Teachers
An importantfinding in the present research is the centralityof the meaning
achieved during the innovation process (Fullan, 1993; Nias, 1996).

Oneof thereasonsthatinnovations are,almostby definition,exceptional

is thatinnovatingis [Link] and manage-
mentpracticesfrequentlyinvolvesconfusion,self-doubt,temporary set-
backs,plateausthatseemto lastforever,new proceduresfordailywork,
shiftsin institutional
influence,andotheruncertainty-arousing eventsthat
mostpeople wouldrathernot endureon a regularbasis.(Huberman &
Miles,1984,p. 72)

Hubermanand Miles found successful innovation to usually entail the an-

ticipation of such events/worries and the adoption of measures to reduce the
intensity of the worries. The relevant organizationalstructuresmust also be re-
designed to actively foster additional learning and collaboration on practical
problems(see also Hatton,1985).Accordingto Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin
(1995), schools can be organized around small cohesive units and can thereby
encourage teachers to personally analyze the teaching envisioned by the inno-
vators. Active and harmonioussmall teams can also enhance the self-esteem of
the members.
Large-scaleprojects are frequentlydevoted to the implementationof alter-
native educationalstructures,majorcurriculumchanges, changing teacher roles,
and radicalchanges in [Link] resultsof such large-scaleprojects
are generallyvery disappointing,however. We observed that 40%of the schools
involved in an innovation still had a very high level of self-concern after more
than 3 years. Such high levels of self-concern can obviously hinder the imple-
mentation of an innovation, and many of the large-scale innovation projectsin
Europe indeed do not produce the results outlined in policy. Huberman(1989)
884

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveReality of Teachers
and Huberman, Grounauer,and Marti(1993) have studied the career experi-
ences of those involved in large-scalereformsand reportthat teachers engaged
in large-scale reforms end their careers with less satisfaction than those who
simply had to tend to their individual classrooms. Little(1996) examined the
reform agendas of teachers involved in the innovation process titled "Reinvent-
ing the High School." A total of 140 interviews in two sites yielded a pool of
approximately50 teachers explicitly expressing support for one or more of the
premises underlying the reform. By the end of the second year, however, 80%
had sufferedserious setbacksor stress,and about 20%had left altogether."Teach-
ers' emotional contours in these two schools tended more often toward increas-
ing frustration,disappointmentor cynicism"(Little,1996, p. 348). In otherwords,
the researchby Littleonce again indicatesthe risksof large-scalereformand the
otherwise unexamined experience of heightened emotionalityon the partof the
teachers involved.
Many of the research data emphasize the assumption that teachers have
their own subjective realities and their own concerns that may depend on the
phase in an innovation. Teachers are not standardized,and teaching is not a
routine. "Reformsthat rely on the transformativepower of individualsto rethink
their practice and to redesign their institutions can be accomplished only by
investing in individualand organizationallearning, in the human capital of the
educational enterprise"(Darling-Hammond,1993, p. 754). Innovators tend to
pay greaterattentionto the capacities of teachers related to the development of
schools as inquisitive and [Link] view acknowledges
that teacherdevelopmentwill vary for teacherswith differentsubjectiverealities.
Thinkingabout teacher development along these lines also suggests a deepen-
ing appreciation for their own subjective educational theories. Educatorsand
teachers should thus work together on real practicalproblems and thereby co-
operate in the development of more meaningfulstandardsfor teaching (Darling-
Hammond, 1996).
Startingfrom the assumption that teaching is the key task of teachers, the
three major variantsof the CBAMcan, in fact, be reduced to a distinction be-
tween an orientationtowardthe functioningof the class (self- and task concerns)
and an orientationtowardthe functioningof the school organization(other con-
cerns). To the degree that the involvement of teachers develops in the direction
of other concern, teachers will go beyond the levels of their own classes. Other
concern implies, among other things, an orientationtoward colleagues (and the
school leadership). The same difference in orientation was also observed by
Hoyle (1989), who distinguished between "restricted"and "extended"profes-
[Link] a teacherwho functionsin a largely
autonomous mannerand views the key to good teaching to be thoroughinstruc-
tion in the different subjects. Such a person is strongly oriented toward subject
content/instructionand thus predominantlyconcerned with the daily activities
within a class. Extended professionalitypertains,in contrast,to a teacher who is
oriented toward joint decision making and qualityteaching in cooperation with
his or her colleagues. Such a person emphasizes professional cooperation and
desires considerable involvement in activitiesat the school level.

885

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
On the basis of this line of thinking, it can be assumed that teachers with
restrictedprofessionalityare primarilyself- and task concerned. Teachers with
extended professionalitywill have primarilyother concerns. Construedin such a
manner,professionalityand other concern are related (Clement et al., 1995). In
terms of professionality,this means that the chances of realizing an innovation
increase as the limited professionalityof teachers grows in the direction of ex-
tended professionality. Startingfrom the relation that has been described be-
tween concerns and professionality,the following assumptioncan also be made:
Innovationswill be implementedmore frequentlyand successfullyto the degree
that teachers develop in the directionof concern for others. Construedin such a
manner, acknowledgment of concern for others as an aspect of professional
development also constitutes an importantstrategyfor educational innovation.
Concern as Ambivalencein Regardto an Innovation
Educationis under constant pressure, and many authorshave sketched a num-
ber of tendencies that appear to be the product of such [Link]
start with, teachers appear to experience increased external pressure as de-
creased appreciationfor their work. In addition, government policy is seen as
quite removed from the realityof the classroom. The more marginalconsensus
among teachers with regardto the content and form of education also appears
to be a partof the pressurethatthey are experiencing. Furthermore,teachers see
a tendency of society to have overly high expectations for education. In this
connection, it is possible to point to the increasingtension that can be observed
between the more "bureaucratic"and more "professional"expectations with
regardto the functioningof [Link] bureaucraticapproachinvolves teach-
ers being evaluated on the basis of uniform rules and procedures. The profes-
sional approach is less clearly formulatedthan the bureaucraticapproach but
nevertheless contains the expectation that teachers should react in a flexible
manner(i.e., professionally)to ongoing developments. The tension between the
more bureaucraticand more professional approaches has undoubtedly led to
increased feelings of insecurity among teachers. The risk of such insecurityis
that teachers will withdraw into their own schools/classrooms and desperately
cling to old habits.
The feelings of ambivalenceamong teachersmay particularlypertainto the
position of their school with regardto decision [Link] response to a decision
to participatein an innovation,for example, questions and tensions with regard
to the current work situation and the new work situation will certainly arise.
However, teachers may have insufficientinsight into the possible materialand
social losses/gains. And in response to a decision to intensifythe implementation
of an innovation,questions can arisewith regardto the forms of cooperationand
the long-termeffects of the innovation. In sum, concerns often involve ambiva-
lence with regardto personallybeing able to meet the demands imposed as part
of an innovation. On the basis of previous personal experiences and the reac-
tions of students to alternativemanners of working, each teacher forms an idea
of his or her personal functioningwith regardto the realizationof innovations.

886

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
Huber (1995) and Kempas, Wahl, and Huber (1995) have published some
importantstudies regardingobserved ambivalence on the part of teachers and
the feelings of certainty/uncertaintyassociated with such ambivalence. In these
studies, the fact that teachers stronglyorient themselves toward greatercertainty
or uncertainty is addressed. The first group (with a so-called certaintyorienta-
tion) is less motivated to develop itself than the second group (with a so-called
uncertaintyorientation).Those teacherswith a certaintyorientationare found to
prefer situationsin which one can speak of little uncertaintyor [Link]
avoid situationsand are thus confrontedas little as possible by new, threatening,
or conceivably [Link] termsof concerns, the degree of self-
concern and task concern will most likely be quite high among the group with
a [Link] teachers with a greaterorientationtoward uncer-
tainty will be more disposed to exert themselves for other concerns. Kempas,
Wahl, and Huber also report the group of teachers with an orientationtoward
uncertaintyto ratherquickly create an educationalclimate leading to innovation
and restructuringof the teaching process.
In sum, the clustersof concern refer to the attitudes,problems, and experi-
ences of the teachers and schools involved in an innovation. While these atti-
tudes can be either positive or negative, it is clear that anyone confronted with
an innovation will have concerns. We are increasingly faced with the task of
making schools more competent to implement innovations. In order to realize
this goal, it is useful to analyze the concerns of teachers in a number of innova-
tion projects and also on a longitudinal basis. One of the projects in question
will thus be followed for a period of 2 years. In addition,teachers'statementsof
their concerns will be compared with their responses to a structuredquestion-
naire based on the stages of concern framework.
ResearchQuestions
In the preceding, it was presupposed that teachers will demonstratedifferent
types of concernat differentstagesin the implementationof an [Link]
develop from self-concernto task concern and, thereafter,other concern. And to
maximize the chances of an innovation succeeding, the school leadership and
facilitatorsof the innovation must connect with the relevantclustersof concern.
The school leadership can do this by providinginterventions(e.g., information,
schooling) thatmatch the natureof the concern encounteredamong the teachers
at the time.
We examined, in a research study, whether teachers at different stages in
the implementation of an innovation actually express different concerns with
respect to the innovation. The Stages of Concern questionnaire was adminis-
tered to three groups of teachers at differentstages in the implementationof an
educational innovation. It was expected that teachers in the beginning stages of
an innovation will show primarilyself-concern and that teachers in the more
advanced stages of an innovation will show primarilyother concern. The third
group of teachers occupying an intermediateposition with regardto the imple-
mentation of the innovation was expected to show primarilytask concern.

887

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
At the same time, we tested the presupposition that teachers who are fur-
ther along in the implementationof an innovation will be found to support the
innovation more and express other types of concerns with regardto the innova-
tion than teachers who are just startingor find themselves right in the middle of
the innovation. In order to gain even more detailed informationon the teachers'
perceptions of the innovation at differentstages in the process of implementa-
tion, some additionalquestions were posed. We evaluated not only the assump-
tion that teachers will express differenttypes of concerns at different stages in
the process of implementationbut also the assumption that teachers at a more
advanced stage in the innovationprocess will supportthe innovationto a greater
degree than teachers at the beginning or in the middle of the innovation pro-
cess. The specific research questions were as follows.
ResearchQuestion 1: Do stage of concern scores for a particularschool (or
group of schools) correspond to the stage of implementationfor the relevant
innovation?
Research Question 2: Do the types of worries demonstrated by teachers
correspond to the data indicatingthe stage of innovation?
Research Question 3: Do the degree to which the teachers are found to
stand behind an innovationand the degree of realizationthey reportcorrespond
to the actual stage in the implementationof the innovation?
ResearchQuestion 4: Does the type of worry demonstratedby the teachers
correspond to their scores on the Stages of Concern questionnaire?
ResearchQuestion5: How do stage of concern scores and types of worries
change over time for the cohort of primaryschool teachers?

Method
Description of ResearchGroupsand Innovations
Adaptive teaching was the innovation being implemented with three groups of
practitioners:teachers in 10 primaryschools, teachers in a secondary school,
and teachers in a higher vocational education school. Each group attemptedto
adopt and realize some form of adaptive teaching. The goal was thus the same
for the differentschools, but the way in which the adaptive teaching was imple-
mented differed.
The teachers in the primaryschools were busy with the introduction of
adaptive teaching and an emphasis on taking the differences between students
into account. Ten schools affiliatedwith two educationalguidance services (five
schools each) were involved in a projectdevoted to the introductionof adaptive
teaching via small- and medium-scaleinterventionsbased on personal (teacher)
action plans. The Stages of Concern questionnairewas administeredat the start
of the project in the fall of 1996 and at the end of the project in the summer of
1998. In the longitudinal study, the teachers formulated their personal action
plans on a bimonthlybasis. Externaland internalfacilitatorshelped them do this
through observation and feedback.
The secondary school is known to be a forerunnerin the area of adaptive
teaching with an emphasis on more independent learning. Characteristicof this
888

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
manner of working is that the students study largely on an independent basis,
that justice is done to the differences between the students, and that each stu-
dent is taught at his or her own level (the same perspective as that of the primary
schools). The implementation of this manner of working was already in an
advanced stage. The teachers have used adaptive teaching for a number of
years, and the administrationis assessing the degree of furtheradaptationneeded
to fit new teaching concepts.
In light of dropping student enrollment, the administrationof the higher
vocational education school decided to introduce adaptive teaching in order to
boost the image of the school. The administrationreportedthis new educational
concept to include two majorelements: a shift from teacher-orientedto student-
oriented teaching and a shift to more active [Link] the time of the present
study, the introductionof the new educational concept was just beginning. The
administrationstood behind the concept, but it did not as yet have the support
of the teachers.
In order to estimate the stage of implementation for the innovation, the
general distinction between adoption, implementation,and institutionalization
was applied (Fullan,1993;Huberman& Miles, 1984). This estimatewas made on
the basis of interviews with the administratorsand educational consultants for
the schools. Adoption involves the processes of becoming conscious and acquir-
ing informationwithout being prepared to actually implement an innovation.
One searches for the value of the relevant innovation for oneself, the students,
and the school. During implementation,in contrast,the emphasis shifts toward
the promotion of activitiesthat will promptteachers to not only adopt the inno-
vations but also put them into actual practice. Institutionalizationimplies atten-
tion to the anchoringof the innovationwithin the school organizationand thereby
sustaining the effects of the innovation.
The estimates of the school administratorsand two educational consultants
per group of practitionerswere made accordingto several [Link] the basis
of previous research (van den Berg & Sleegers, 1995), we derived the following
two criteriafor the selection of the schools: (a) the numberof innovationprojects
realized in the past and (b) the numberof areas presentlyundergoingthe imple-
mentation of adaptive teaching. In such a manner, selection of schools was
based on a school's progress with regardto adaptive teaching (see Table 1). On
the basis of these criteria,the administratorsand educational consultants were

Table1
Stage of Innovation,and Expected Cluster of
Concern for the Three Research Groups

Highervocationalschool Primaryschool Secondaryschool

Innovation stage Adoption Implementation Institutionalization
Expected cluster
of concern Self Task Other

889

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
asked to rate the schools (ratherthan the teachers) with regardto their progress
in the implementation of adaptive teaching. The results were validated at the
school level with observations. This method was based on "intersubjectivity by
explicitness,"which involves a careful description of research units and argu-
ments for particularchoices.
We expected the teachers in the vocational school to be at the adoption
stage of innovation. On the basis of the concerns-based model and theory de-
scribed in the preceding sections, we predicted the teachers to be predomi-
nantly self-concerned. The teachers in the primaryschools were expected to be
at the implementation stage of innovation and thus were expected to be pre-
dominantlytask concerned. It was expected that the teachers in the secondary
school were at the institutionalizationstage of innovation and would be pre-
dominantlyother concerned.
Instrumentation:Concern Scales
The types of concerns outlined in the previous section have been expanded into
seven stages of concern. These are not the originalAmericanstages but adapta-
tions based on our own research(for the particularadaptationsand an extended
explanation of the manner in which this was done, see van den Berg &
Vandenberghe,1981, 1995). Only a brief descriptionof the seven stages of con-
cern is presented here (see Table 2). A few specific differences between the
Americanand Dutch-Belgianquestionnairesand the internalconsistency of the
scales are also described. The seven stages are as follows.
Awareness:The teacher shows little concern for the innovation, has little or
no interest in the innovation, or simply knows very little about the innovation.
Personal concern/need for information: The teacher is interested in the
changes that may occur in his or her personal work situation,in the manner in
which he or she may be requiredto preparehis or her dailywork, and in the time
that may be needed to realize the [Link] or she also wants the opportu-
nity to study and/or discuss informationwith regardto the innovationand wants
to know what colleagues think about the innovationand what they are doing.

Table2
Clusters and Stages of Concern

Clusters Stages
Self-concern 0 Awareness
1 Personalconcern/need for information
2 Consequences for pupils
Task concern 3 Management
Other concern 4 Collaboration
5 Refocusingon the basis of experiences with pupils
6 Refocusing

890

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
Consequencesfor students:Still in doubt about the value and necessity of
the innovation and the effects of the innovation on the students, the teacher
wants to know more about the actual impact of the innovation. The teacher
wants some indication of the value of the innovation for the students. Doubts
that the teacher may have are expressed in the form of concern for the students.
Management: Attention is predominantlypaid to daily tasks and the best
realizationof the innovation possible. One is primarilygeared toward the solu-
tion of practicalproblems arising more or less regularly.
Collaboration:The concerns here pertain first and foremost to collabora-
tion with colleagues in order to better implementthe [Link] considers
consultation and coordinationwith colleagues important.
Refocusingon the basis of experienceswith students:One is geared toward
adaptationand-to the degree possible-revision of an innovation on the basis
of the reactions of students and concrete results obtained with students.
Refocusing:One has more or less concrete alterationsin mind and wants to
put these into practice, or one sees clear alternativesto the currentinnovation
and, when necessary, wants to replace it.
The differences between the questionnairedeveloped in the United States
and the Dutch-Belgianquestionnairewere the [Link] Dutch-Belgianques-
tionnairehas 52 items, while the Americanquestionnairehas 35 items. The se-
quence of stages is different,as well as the numberof itemswithineach stage. Six-,
seven-, and eight-factorsolutions were comparedwith each other. For inclusion
of a statementwithin a particularfactor,a minimumloading of .30 was consis-
tently [Link] seven-factorsolution produced the most reasonabledescrip-
tion of the underlyingfactor structure.Factor1 is a combinationof two phases
distinguished in the Americanquestionnaire,namely "informational" and "per-
sonal." The interpretationof Factor 2 was reasonably clear and closely corre-
sponded to the "collaboration"phase of innovation in the Americanquestion-
naire. Factor3 could be described as "consequencesfor the students."Factor4
could be clearlydescribed as "management."Factor5 closely resembled "aware-
ness." Factor6 was interpreted,in keeping with the Americanquestionnaire,as
"refocusing."Finally,Factor7 could be described as furtherspecificationof the
involvementin refocusingon the basis of the teacher'sexperiences with the stu-
[Link] the underlyingstructures(i.e., phases)encounteredin the American
questionnaire,the co-occurrenceof "informational" and "personal"stands out.
With an eye to the conduct of an item analysis and keeping the results of
the factor analysis in mind, seven scales were composed. Inclusion in a scale
was done on the basis of a particularstatement loading highest on that factor
and some degree of correspondence between the interpretationof the factor
and the meaning of the particularscale. In the item analyses, a number of itera-
tions were conducted with an eye to attainingscales with maximum reliability
(alpha coefficients).
In the 1980s, the questionnaire referringto the stages of concern was ad-
ministeredto teachers involved in differentprimaryand secondary school inno-
vations. The internalconsistency of the scales developed on the basis of factor
analyses was examined by calculating Cronbach alpha coefficients (van den
891

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
Table3
Reliabilityof the Stages of ConcernScales for
FourDifferentResearchGroups

Cronbach
alpha
Scale vdB&VB S&VV vdG&H vdG&H

0. Awareness .77 .74 .70 .72

1. Personal concern/need for information .90 .87 .83 .87
2. Consequences for pupils .80 .86 .78 .77
3. Management .88 .90 .89 .87
4. Collaboration .85 .69 .81 .86
5. Refocusing on the basis of experiences
with pupils .73 .71 .64 .69
6. Refocusing .74 .72 .70 .63

[Link]&VB= researchfromvan den Bergand Vandenberghe(1981)among 208 primary

school teachersand 1,377secondaryschool teachers;S&VV= researchfromSpanandvan
Veldhuizen(1985) among280 primaryschool teachers;vdG&H= researchfromVande Grift
and Houtveen(1988) among 168 primaryschool teachers;vdG&H= researchfromVande
Griftand Houtveen(1988) among277 secondaryschool teachers.

Berg & Vandenberghe,1981, 1995). The alphas found in the differentstudies are
reported in Table 3.
Span and van Veldhuizen(1985) used the questionnaireto evaluate the so-
called activation process in primaryeducation. The relevant innovation was a
break with the traditionalyear/class system. The reliabilityof the seven scales
was examined, and comparison of the obtained alpha coefficients with those
from van den Berg and Vandenbergheshowed that six of the seven scales did
not significantlyvary and were thus [Link] the collaborationscale showed
decreased reliability, which-according to Span and van Veldhuizen (1985,
p. 194)--could be due to the possible double interpretationof a number of the
statements constitutingthis scale.
Van de Grift and Houtveen (1988, p. 15) have also conducted research
using this questionnaire. Their data are presented in Table 3 as well. These
authors question the reliabilityof the two refocusing scales and provide four
possible explanations:unreliabilityas a result of idiosyncrasiesassociated with
the subject sample, deviations in the interpretationsof the items by different
groups of respondents, applicationof various iterationsto the same data for the
constructionof the scales, or differencesin the innovationsused to constructthe
[Link] the basis of the preceding, we can nevertheless conclude that
the scales are generally reliable and that use of the scales in furtherresearch is
thus [Link] present research,we thus take the studies by van den Berg
and Vandenberghe(1981, 1995) as representingthe norm.
In additionto the Stages of Concernquestionnaire,a number of extra ques-
tions were posed in order to gain greater insight into the nature of teacher
concerns duringthe differentstages of [Link] teacherswere firstasked
892

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
to note theirtwo greatestworrieswith respect to the [Link] were then
asked to indicate the degree to which they stood behind the innovation and the
extent to which they thought the innovation had been realized. Finally, the
teachers were asked to provide a few backgroundfacts.

Response Rates
All of the teachers in the relevant schools/departmentswere asked to complete
the [Link] questionnaireswere distributedby the school administra-
tors or departmentheads with an emphatic request to complete them. The ques-
tionnairesfor the primaryschools were not completed anonymously since these
schools chose to examine the resultsfor each [Link] questionnairesfor the
secondary and vocational schools were completed and processed anonymously.
The response rates for each research group were as follows: primaryschools,
98% (n = 129); secondary school, 66% (n = 33); and vocational school, 37%
(n = 110). The response rate for the primaryschools was found to be quite high
since completion of the questionnairewas partof the projecton adaptiveteach-
ing. The response rate for the secondary school was reasonable. Only a small
percentage of the vocational education teachers completed the questionnaire.
This low response rate may reflect a marginaldegree of involvement among the
teachers in the innovation, and, given this low rate,the resultsfor the vocational
education teachers cannot be considered representativefor the school.

Analyses
The reliabilityof the stages of concern was examined separatelyfor each of the
researchgroups. Thereafter,the scores for the three groups on the scales repre-
senting the stages of concern were compared via analyses of variance(Research
Question 1). In order to answer the second researchquestion, we analyzed the
particularpoints of worry mentioned by the teachers. For this purpose, the
relevantthree clustersof worrywere identifiedanalogous to the three clustersof
concern.
Self-worries:Worriesindicatingthat the relevantteacher does not accept the
innovation (shows resistance)or is insufficientlyinformedabout the innovation.
For example, "Westill don't know what the vague slogans based on the educa-
tional concept mean for concrete practice"and "Thisis the fourth educational
innovation I've gone through; it's always a lot of work while nothing really
changes."
[Link] the relevantteacher has problemswith
the conduct of the innovation. For example, "I'mgiven too little time or means
to prepare the innovation and implement it" and "The classes are too big to
realize adaptive teaching."
"Other"worries:Worrieswith regardto the progress of the innovation, ad-
aptation of the innovation to new developments, and integration with other
innovations. For example, "Howcan we realize all of the new concepts with the
mannerof working in our school?"and "Howdo we get other (older) colleagues
to also implement the innovation?"Specific examples of the different types of
worries are presented in the Appendix.
893

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros

The categorizationof the particularworries was performed by a panel of

five experts (with knowledge of concerns-basedtheory). Forthis purpose, three
quartersof the points of worry were presented to the experts in random order.
Comparisonshowed 72%of the points of worry to be categorized similarlyby a
minimum of four experts. The points of worry on which agreement could not
initiallybe reached largelyinvolved statementsthat could be interpretedin more
than one [Link] reexamined these points together with a thirdexpert and
were able to categorize the majorityof the points [Link] remain-
ing 25%of the points of worry were also categorized in this manner.A total of
441 points of worry were evaluated. Nine (or 2%) of the points could not be
categorized in the end because the statements were simply too unclear. Next,
three variables were created: one variable for each type of worry. Each of the
teachers (who were asked to mention two points of worry) was assigned a score
of 0, 1, or 2 for each of the three types of [Link] score indicatesthe number
of points of worry mentioned for a particularcluster.
In order to answer the third research question, we once again undertook
analyses of variance. To examine whether teachers mentioning more self-
worries also scored higher for the stage of concern involving self-concern (the
fourth research question), we calculated correlationsbetween the worry vari-
ables and the stage of concern. And, to answer the fifth research question with
regardto the longitudinalresults, we performed analyses of variance.

Results
ResearchQuestion 1
Before answering the first question, the Cronbachalphas for the seven scales
representing the different stages of concern were calculated for each research
group. From Table 4, it can be seen that the Cronbachalphas for the last two
scales/stages are on the low side for the primaryschools and the higher voca-

Table4
CronbachAlphas per School/Research Group

Higher
Primary Secondary vocational Numberof
Scale schools school school items
0. Awareness .73 .69 .74 7
1. Personal concern/need for
information .81 .95 .84 12
2. Consequences for pupils .64 .82 .77 5
3. Management .88 .87 .85 10
4. Collaboration .76 .91 .83 8
5. Refocusing on the basis of
experiences with pupils .69 .88 .55 5
6. Refocusing .65 .82 .67 5

894

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Subjective Reality of Teachers
tional school, while the alphas for the secondaryschool are sufficientlyhigh. For
the secondary school, however, the Cronbachalpha for the first scale is some-
what lower than for the other research groups. It can be assumed that items
pertainingto the refocusingof the innovationhave little significancefor teachers
who have yet to begin or are just beginning an innovation. For teachers who
have been working on an innovation for a longer period of time, in contrast,the
items pertainingto an awareness of the innovation will have little significance.
Although the secondary school involved only 33 respondents, it can neverthe-
less be tentativelyconcluded that the reliabilityof particularlythe last two scales
increases as the implementationof the innovation reaches an advanced stage.
In orderto answer the firstresearchquestion, the sum scores for the various
scales were compared with those of a norm group (see the firstcolumn of Table
3). The obtained percentile scores for the seven stages of innovation are pre-
sented in Figure 1.
The significance of the observed differences was evaluated on the basis of
univariateanalysesof [Link] the threescales measuringself-concern(aware-
ness, personal concern/need for information,consequences for students), the
teachers in the secondary school scored lower than those in the other schools
(Fs = 12.5, 27.3, and 14.00 for the respective scales, ps < .001). The teachers in
the secondary school showed greater interest in the innovation in their school
than the teachers in the other schools. The teachers in the secondary school also
had less of a need for informationwith regardto the innovation than the other
teachers. On the self-concern scale relating to the consequences for students,

percentile
100
90 - Higher-vocationaleducation
[ Primaryschools
80 E- Secondary school
70
60 -
50
40
30
20
10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
stages of concern

Figure1. Scores on the stages of concern for the three research groups
895

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros

the difference between the teachers in the secondary school and the teachers in
the primaryschools was not found to be significant;the difference between the
teachers in the higher vocational school and those in the primaryschools did
prove to be [Link] teachers in the vocational school are worryingabout
the consequences of the new educational concept for their students more than
the teachers in the primaryschools. They are worryingabout the consequences
of adaptive teaching for their students. With regard to the task-concern scale
relatingto management, the teachers in the vocational school again scored sig-
nificantlyhigher than the teachers in the other schools (F= 11.9,p < .001). This
means that the teachers in the vocational school see more practicalproblems in
the implementationof the innovation than the teachers in the other schools.
The last three scales pertainto other concern. The percentiles for the scale
relatingto collaborationwere not found to [Link] teachers in all
of the schools under study appeared to have some concern about the collabora-
tion on the innovation and the coordination of their work with that of their
colleagues. On the two scales pertainingto refocusing,the teachers in the higher
vocational school scored significantlyhigher than the teachers in the primary
schools (F= 3.4, p < .05, and F= 8.6, p < .001).
Closer examination of the results showed the teachers in the vocational
school to score higher on not only the scales pertainingto self-concern but also
those pertainingto refocusing. On the basis of many years of experience with
the present instrumentationand the rules of interpretationdeveloped for this
instrumentation(see van den Berg & Vandenberghe, 1981, 1995), it is known
that a high degree of self-concern accompanied by high scores with regardto
refocusing means that teachers want to modify an innovation before they have
even begun or sufficientlybegun on the innovation. Such a patternalso points
to a high degree of resistance (i.e., self-concern).
At the secondaryschool, the accentclearlylies on [Link] teachers
are sufficientlyinformed and aware of the content and significance of the inno-
vation and thus encounter few problems with the realizationof the innovation.
One is prepared to revise one's method of working partiallyon the basis of
developments and experiences with students. The picture of the teachers in the
primaryschools is the most diffuse. These teachers have a greaterneed to know
the significance of adaptive teaching for their own work, encounter numerous
problems in the actualrealizationof adaptiveteaching in their lessons, and have
fewer concrete ideas for the refocusing of the innovation.
ResearchQuestion 2
The second researchquestion pertainsto the specific points of worrymentioned
by the teachers. The distribution of the worries across the three clusters
is examined. In Table 5, the percentages for the particulartypes of worry (i.e.,
self-, task, and other worry) are presented.
The teachers in the higher vocational school mentioned significantlymore
self-worries than the teachers in the other schools (F = 23.2, p < .001), the
teachers in the primaryschools mentioned significantlymore task worries (F=
14.2,p < .001), and the teachers in the secondary school mentioned significantly
896

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
Table5
Percentages of Worriesper Cluster

Higher
vocationalschool schools
Primary school Total
Secondary
Self-worry 40 15 0 25
Task worry 45 70 50 55
Otherworry 15 15 50 20

more other worries (F= 10.8,p < .001). Type of worry thus appears to correlate
with stage of innovation. To the extent that one can speak of a shift from adop-
tion (the vocational school) to institutionalization(the secondary school), we
see a decrease in self-worries and an increase in other worries. The primary
schools are in the implementation stage, and the teachers thus mention pre-
dominantlytask worries.
It is strikingthat the majorityof the points of worry pertainto the conduct
of particulartasks. Lackof time, work pressure, and--particularlyfor the teach-
ers in the primaryschools--size of classes are the most frequently mentioned
worries (when all of the teachers are considered together).
ResearchQuestion 3
Table 6 presents the degree to which the teachers report themselves to stand
behind the innovationand perceive the innovationas having been implemented.
The question pertainingto the latterpoint was not raisedwith the teachers in the
higher vocational school, since the actual introductionof the new school con-
cept (i.e., application in the class) had yet to occur. The scores in Table 7 can
range from 1 (completely not) to 4 (completely/to a large degree).
The teachersin the secondaryschool and the teachersin the primaryschools
stand behind the innovations in their schools to a greaterdegree than the teach-
ers in the higher vocational school. The teachers in the secondary school have
already--in their perception--realized the innovation to a large degree, while
the teachers in the primaryschools have implemented adaptiveteaching to only

Table6
Degree to WhichTeachers Stand Behind the
Innovationand Degree to WhichTheyThinkIt Has Been Realized

Higher Primary Secondary

vocationalschool schools school Total
Stand behind the innovation 2.7 3.4 3.7 3.1
Innovationhas been realized 2.0 3.8 2.4
Note. 1 = completely not, 4 = completely/to a large degree.

897

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
Table7
SignificantCorrelationsBetweenSchoolScores:
Stages of Concernand Numberof Worries
Self-worries Taskworries Otherworries
Self-concern
Awareness .29 -.28
Personalconcern/needfor
information .20 -.28
Consequencesforpupils .41 -.28
Taskconcern
Management -.18
Otherconcern
Collaboration -.17 .21
Refocusingon the basisof
experienceswithpupils
Refocusing .16 -.22

a very small degree. The degree to which teachers stand behind the innovation
and the degree to which it has been realized in their opinion thus appear to
correlatewith the stage of innovation. The teachers in the vocational school are
indeed in the adoption stage; the teachers in the secondary school are in the
institutionalizationstage; and the teachers in the primaryschools occupy a posi-
tion in between, namely the implementationstage.
ResearchQuestion 4
To answer the fourth research question, we calculated significant correlations
between the scales representingthe stages of concern and the number of self-,
task, and other worries mentioned by the [Link] the significantcorrela-
tions were low, they neverthelessoccurredin the expected [Link] scores
for the stages representingself-concern correlatepositively with the number of
self-worries mentioned and negatively with the number of other worries. This
correlationmay stem in partfrom the fact that the task worries largelyconsist of
too little time and overly large classes. The scores for the stages representing
other concern, and particularlythe scale relatingto collaboration,correlateposi-
tively with the numberof other worries mentioned and negativelywith the num-
ber of [Link] scores for the refocusing scale, however, correlateposi-
tively with the numberof self-worriesmentioned and negativelywith the number
of task worries mentioned. As already observed, this finding indicates teachers
who want to change an innovation (without having actuallybegun on it).
ResearchQuestion 5
In the present research, the Stages of Concern questionnairewas administered
in the elementary schools prior to the start and after the completion of the
adaptive teaching program,which had a duration of 2 years. On the basis of
current theories of school involvement/concerns, it was expected that a shift
898

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
Percentiles
100
90 - Before participation
80 Afterparticipation
70

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Self-concern Taskconcern concern
Impact

Figure2. Scores on the stages of concern for primaryschools before and

after participationin the adaptive teaching program

would occur during the projectfrom self-concern to task concern to other con-
cern. The degree of self-concern on the part of the teachers was thus expected
to decrease while the degree of other concern increased. Figure 2 presents
Stages of Concern questionnaireresults for the 93 teachers who participatedat
both measurementpoints. As can been seen, the scores indeed decreased on the
three scales indicatingself-concern (i.e., the awareness, personal concern/need
for information,and consequences for the students scales).
A paired-sample t test also showed the decrease in self-concern to be sig-
nificant for all three scales (p < .001). The scores on the management scale,
which indicates task concern, decreased as well, although the difference was
not found to be [Link] scores on only one of the three scales indicating
other concern were found to increase significantly,namely the refocusing scale
(p < .05). The teachers are thus more supportive of adaptive teaching, have
greater insight into the consequences of the innovation for themselves and the
students, and have more ideas with regardto adjustmentof the innovationat the
end of the programthan at the beginning.
The teachers not only completed the Stages of Concern questionnairebut
also indicatedtheirtwo greatestworries both priorto initiationand aftercomple-
tion of the [Link] Table 8, the percentages of self-, task, and other worries
reported before and after completion of the project are presented for the 78
teachers who responded to the question on both measurement occasions. As
899

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
Table8
Distributionof Different
Typesof Worriesin Primary
Schools BeforeandAfterParticipation
in the AdaptiveTeachingProgram

Before (%) After(%)

Self 13 1
Task 73 83
Other 14 16

can be seen, the most importantpoints of worries for the teachers aftercomple-
tion of the projectwere predominantlytask concerns. Self-concernswere virtu-
ally unmentioned by this point, and the decrease in the percentage of self-
worries from premeasurementto postmeasurementwas found to be significant
(p < .001). In contrast,the percentage of task worries increased significantly(p <
.05). The percentage of other worries was not found to change significantly.
Qualitative analyses of the task worries showed many of the teachers to still
have problems with the differentiationof their attentionto the students;that is,
they continue to report problems with the organizationof the educational ideal
of adaptive teaching within their class.
Nevertheless indicative of the effectiveness of the adaptive teaching pro-
gram are the developments observed in the primaryschools that we followed
for a period of 2 years. These schools received intensive guidance with regardto
the theme of adaptive teaching, and a significantshift from self-concern to task
concern and other concern was indeed observed.

Discussion and Implications

The present study examined whether or not teachers at differentstages in the

implementationof an innovationhave differentattitudestoward the innovation.
Moreprecisely,we examined whether teachersin the adoption phase, the imple-
mentation phase, or the institutionalizationphase differ with regardto type of
concernand degree of motivationforthe [Link] expected,teachers
in the institutionalizationphase appeared to stand more behind the innovation
than those in the implementationphase, and teachers in the implementation
phase stood more behind the innovation than those in the adoption phase. It
should be noted that the response ratefor the highervocationaleducationteach-
ers was particularlylow. It is possible that the new instructionalconcept has yet
to take root among this population. The degree to which this low response rate
may have influenced the present results is not known. Whetheror not the par-
ticulartype of school influenced the resultsis also not known. Furtherresearchis
thus needed to determine whether the perceptions of innovations by primary
school teachers and higher vocational education teachers actuallydiffer.
The researchdata reported here show the Stages of Concern questionnaire
to provide greater insight into the subjective realities of teachers involved in
900

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
educational innovation. Depending on the stage of the innovation, the subjec-
tive realities of teachers can [Link] the extent that schools have progressed
furtherwith an innovation,the data show differences in the types of concern. In
the three phases of innovation (i.e., adoption, implementation,and institutional-
ization), one can speak of specific points of worry on the part of the teachers
involved in the innovation. In the adoption phase, more self-worries are men-
tioned. Task worries are emphasized in the implementationphase. And those
teachers mentioning more "other"worries tend to work in a school assigned a
prioriby us to the institutionalizationphase. In addition to these specific differ-
ences between the schools/research groups, we also saw a consistent and rela-
tively high degree of task worryacrossthe differentgroups. These worriesclearly
pertainto the conduct of tasks needed for the implementationof an innovation.
A content analysis of the points of worry showed two of the three research
groups to score particularlyhigh in the so-called "self/taskcluster"of worries.
This mix of concerns can be seen to reflect ambivalencewith regardto person-
ally being able to meet the demands imposed by a particulartask. It is also a
naturalreaction for teachers to want to avoid situations that may be personally
perceived as difficult (Marsh, 1985). The research groups showing the most
progress with regardto an innovation were also found to score the most in the
"task/othercluster"of concerns. This mix of concerns reflects an emphasis on
problems relatingto the conduct of particulartasks, cooperation with colleagues
in the conduct of these tasks, and the optimal functioning of students.
The phases of innovation constitute a useful frameworkfor examinationof
the change process. Many researchershave moved away from this framework
(e.g., see Fullan, 1993), but such a frameworkappears to be particularlyuseful
for analyzingthe subjective realitiesof teachers duringeducational innovations.
The subjective realities of teachers are clearly linked to the process of innova-
tion: the decision to adopt an innovation,the implementation(early and late) of
an innovation, and the institutionalizationof an innovation. We selected a vari-
ety of innovation sites in order to examine the differentpoints in the innovation
process and the differentrequirementsimposed on the classroomand the school.
In any case, it is critical that teaching processes with such self- and task
concerns as their startingpoint be introduced. Such a teaching perspective is
importantnot only for teacherdevelopment in general (Darling-Hammond,1996)
but also for the development of an extended professionality(Hoyle, 1989). To
the degree that self- and task concerns decrease and other concerns increase,
that is, teachers develop in the directionof extended [Link] acqui-
sition of additional knowledge and new teaching skills is thus importantfor
good teaching. The three groups of practitionersstudied here were asked to
apply an innovation deemed as importantby someone outside the [Link]
addition to this, however, more explicit attentionshould be paid to the opinions
of the teachersthemselves. Adequateknowledge acquisitionand effortsdirected
at behavioralchange require teachers to want an externallyimposed change, to
know what they are doing, and to understandwhy they are doing it. Reflection
is obviously necessary. Withoutsuch reflection,it is simply not possible to fit the
desired change into a teacher's teaching repertoire,which is the entire body of

901

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros

knowledge, norms, values, preferences, interests, and behavioral schemes that

teachers have at their disposal.
It is importantto strivetoward forms of interventionin which differencesin
the opinions of teachers with regardto their work are taken into consideration.
Increasinglyindividualizedanalyses, feedback, and interactiveanalyses may be
the result. In this light, we can also make a plea for the development of quality
instrumentsto analyze possible feelings of ambivalence with regardto an inno-
vation (either with or without the aid of administratorsand implementers). In
our opinion, such measures can clearlyfacilitatethe difficultprocesses of imple-
mentation and institutionalization.
Probably,there is an individual orientationtoward the world and oneself
that appears to foster stabilizingtendencies and anotherorientationthat appears
to preparepeople for cognitive [Link] Short(1986) raised
the question of whether reactions to controversies are mediated by what they
call uncertainty versus certainty orientations, which are modes or styles of
cognitively coping with situations or actions with a particulardegree of uncer-
tainty or certainty. According to Sorrentinoand Short, so-called "uncertainty-
oriented"people tend to actively expose themselves to situationsthat are open,
unclear,and uncertainwith regardto their consequences. In contrast,"certainty-
oriented"people will actively avoid or circumventsituationswith uncertaincon-
sequences. Certainty-orientedpeople are, firstand foremost, motivatedto main-
tain their view of themselves and their surroundings,which means that they
avoid submittingtheir views to any scrutiny,discussion, or revision.
We would like to stress the importance of determiningwhether a match
exists between orientationstyle and the concerns described by teachers. Huber
(1995) and Kempas et al. (1995) have shown uncertainty-orientedteachers
to arrangesignificantlymore stimulatingand open learning situationsthan cer-
tainty-orientedteachers. Assessment of the degree of tolerance for uncertainty
among teachers therefore constitutes an importantaspect of instructionalplan-
ning and curriculumdecision making. Aftertraining,seminars,and workshops,
uncertainty-orientedteachers will be eager to adopt new methods ("Well,let's
give it a try")and learn from their mistakes ("It'snot the method but the manner
in which I applied it").Certainty-orientedteacherswill be hesitant ("IfI'm going
to do it, I want to be sure that it's going to work")and will find good reasons for
not adopting the new approach ("Itis too difficultfor my subject-matterarea")
(Huber, 1995, p. 2).
Teachersthus come to seminarsand workshops with their own orientations
and their own needs or concerns, which means that seminars and workshops
with the modificationof instructionalbehavior as their goal must startfrom the
subjective realities of the individual teachers involved. But many teachers may
actively resist such stimulationor change and show a strong self-stabilizingten-
dency. Such a tendency will manifest itself as self-concerns and task concerns,
which are-in our view--characteristic of certainty-orientedteachers. The rela-
tion between the degree of certainty/uncertaintycharacteristicof a particular
situation and teacher concerns appears to be criticalfor teachers'planning, de-
cision making, and especially those activitiesthat indicate the educational style
902

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
of a [Link] trainingmay have to be provided for teachers
with a high level of self- and task concerns or teachers with a pronounced
certaintyorientation.
The desired attention to the certainty/uncertaintyorientations of teachers
can be fostered by the conduct of small, short-termprojectsthat can be of great
value when implemented as a series. As part of the preparationfor such small-
scale experiments,teachers may be asked to develop a personal plan of action.
These personal action plans can involve the specificationof what those involved
in the project/experimentwould like to do within the frameworkof the innova-
tion in, for example, the following 2 months. In the formulationof such stepwise
action plans, the particularconcerns and orientationsof individualteachers will
thus be addressed, which is in keeping with observations in classrooms and
seminars showing issues of personal development to be highly influentialfor
teacher education (Huber& Roth, 1990, p. 131). Copingwith the subjectivereali-
ties of teachers implies recognitionof the teacher'sprofessionalself and restora-
tion of the necessary working conditions for good teaching performance
(Kelchtermans,1996). Such an awareness is particularlyimportantin these times
of turbulenteducationalpolicies and the not only increasedbut often contradic-
tory demands imposed on schools and teachers by such policies.

APPENDIX
Examples of DifferentTypes of Worries
Self-Worries(HigherVocationalSchool)
1. This is the fourth educational innovation I've gone through;it's always a lot of work
while nothing really changes.
2. We still don't know what the vague slogans based on the educationalconcept mean in
practice.
3. The new educational concept is introduced with a few propaganda terms and no
research.
4. I have no insight into what is going to change.
5. I'm worried about whether I will be employed at the same school or not.
6. What does the innovation actuallymean for my functioning?
7. I am worried about the degree to which those responsible for the implementationare
not involved in actual teaching/educationalimprovement.
8. I'm afraidI won't be able to handle things.
9. The concept has been imposed top-down and is insufficientlyfollowed by teachers.
10. I am almost certain that the desired didactic concepts will not receive adequate
expression.
TaskWorries(PrimarySchools)
1. The organizationof the teaching materialsin relation to the attainmentof the final
objectives per school year is very difficult.
2. The factor "time":continuallymore subjects,which gives you the feeling of constantly
being in a rush.
3. Sufficientaccess to appropriatematerials.
4. That the workload will still (perhaps) increase as a result.
5. Organization:How can I realize this with large classes and an overloaded teaching
schedule?

903

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 van den Berg and Ros
6. Keeping an overview of the learning/developmentalstage of everyone and the appro-
priate educational materialsfor this.
7. Size of the groups and the availabletime within the teaching schedule.
8. The changing of routines that have been slipped into.
9. Time!!!!
10. The practicalrealizationin alreadylarge classes and the time that this demands of you
and you don't always have.
11. Practicalpoints including space, teaching and other aid materials,organization.
12. The heavy workload, especially in combined groups.
OtherWorries(SecondarySchool)
1. Too little evaluation of what we have changed or what we are doing.
2. How do we realize all of the new concepts with the mannerof working in our (little)
school?
3. I think sufficient attentionshould be paid to "learningto learn."
4. Other schools are moving in the same [Link] can'tstand still.
5. Littleprogress has been made in discovering "learningto learn."
6. Some colleagues are simply too lazy to performtheir work with sufficienteffort.
7. I want to get a better hold on the students' learning process in order to facilitate
"learningto learn."
8. The red line is (too often) absent:For many students,such a line would create (much)
more clarityin a number of areas (planning, learning,learning to learn, dictation).
9. The entire team should be on the same wavelength.

References
Clement, M., Sleegers, P., & Vandenberghe,R. (1995). Professionaliteitvan docenten en
[Link] R. van den Berg & R. Vandenberghe(Eds.), Wegenvan Betrokken-
heid: Reflectiesop onderwijsvernieuwig[Waysof being concerned: Reflections on
educational innovation](pp. 190-208). Tilburg,the Netherlands:Zwijsen.
Cruickshank,D. R., Lorisch,C., & Thompson, L.(1979). Whatwe thinkwe know about in-
service [Link] of TeacherEducation, 30, 27-32.
Darling-Hammond,L. (1993). Reframingthe school reformagenda: Developing capacity
for school [Link] Delta Kappan, 74, 752-761.
Darling-Hammond,L.(1996). The quiet revolution:Rethinkingteacherdevelopment. Edu-
cational Leadership,53(6), 4-10.
Darling-Hammond,L., & McLaughlin,M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional
development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597-604.
Fullan,M. (1993). Changeforces:Probingthe depthsof educational [Link]:Falmer
Press.
Fuller, F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental [Link]
Educational ResearchJournal, 6, 207-226.
Gitlin,A., & Margonis,F. (1995). The politicalaspect of reform:Teacherresistanceas good
sense. AmericanJournal of Education, 103, 377-405.
Hall, G. E., George, A. A., & Rutherford,W.L.(1977). Measuringstages of concern about
the innovation:Manualfor use of the [Link]:Researchand Devel-
opment Centerfor Teacher Education,Universityof Texas.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools:Facilitating [Link]:State
Universityof New YorkPress.
Hargreaves,A. (1994). Changing teachers,changing times:Teachers'workand culture in
thepost-modern age. London:Cassell.
Harrison,I. (1991). Facilitating the developmentof teacher assessment:Using the CBAM-
model. Paper presented at the InternationalConferenceon EducationalChange.
904

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TheSubjectiveRealityof Teachers
Hatton, E. J. (1985). Team teaching and teacher orientationto work: Implicationsfor the
preservice and inservice preparationof [Link] ofEducation for Teaching,
11, 228-244.
Hopkins, D. (1990). Integratingstaff development and school improvement:A study of
teacher personality and school climate. In B. Joyce (Ed.), Changing school culture
through staff development(1990 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and
CurriculumDevelopment, pp. 41-67). Alexandria,VA:Association for Supervision
and CurriculumDevelopment.
Hoyle, E. (1989). The primaryschool teacher as a [Link] M. Galton & A. Blyth
(Eds.),Handbookofprimaryeducationin Europe(pp.415-432). London:DavidFulton.
Huber, G. L. (1995). Assessingtolerance of [Link] presented at the 6th Euro-
pean Conferencefor Researchon Learningand Cognition,Nijmegen,the Netherlands.
Huber, G., & Roth,J. (1990). Teachers'classroom activitiesand certainty/uncertaintyori-
entation. In C. Day, M. Pope, & P. Denicolo (Eds.), Insightsand teachers'thinking
and practice (pp. 199-233). London:FalmerPress.
Huberman,A. M. (1989). The professionallife cycle of teachers. TeachersCollegeRecord,
91, 31-57.
Huberman, A. M., Grounauer,M., & Marti,J. (1993). The lives of teachers. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Huberman,A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close:How school improvement
[Link] York:Plenum.
Kelchtermans,G. (1996). Teachervulnerability:Understandingits moraland politicalroots.
CambridgeJournal ofEducation, 26, 307-323.
Kempas, G., Wahl, D., & Huber, G. L. (1995). Adapting teacher trainingfor thepromo-
tion of active learning to teachers'tolerance of uncertainty. Paper presented at the
6th European Conference for Research on Learningand Cognition, Nijmegen, the
Netherlands.
Little,J. W. (1996). The emotional contours and career trajectoriesof (disappointed) re-
form enthusiasts. CambridgeJournal ofEducation, 26, 345-359.
Little,J. W., & McLaughlin,M. (1993). Teachers'work:Individuals, colleagues, and con-
texts. New York:TeachersCollege Press.
Marsh,D. D. (1985, April). Addressing teachers'personal concerns in staff development
[Link] presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanEducationalResearch
Association, San Francisco.
Meehan, M. L. (1987). Elementaryand secondary principals as classroom management
[Link] [Link]& G. Hall(Eds.),Researchon internal change
facilitation in schools(pp. 9-48). Leuven, Belgium:Acco.
Nias, J. (1996). Thinking about feeling: The emotions in teaching. CambridgeJournal of
Education, 26, 293-306.
Olson, J. K. (1980). Teacher constructs and curriculumchange. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 12, 1-11.
Richardson,V. (1990). Significantand worthwhile change in teaching practice. Educa-
tional Researcher,19(7), 10-18.
Richardson,V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between
teachers'beliefs and practicesin reading comprehension [Link] Edu-
cational ResearchJournal, 28, 554-586.
Rutherford,W. L.,& Murphy,S. C. (1985). Change in high schools: Roles and reactionsof
teachers. In W. L. Rutherfordet al. (Eds.), Changing the American high school: De-
scriptions and prescriptions(pp. 3-29). Austin: Research and Development Center
for Teacher Education,Universityof Texas.
Sorrentino,R. M., & Short,J. C. (1986). Uncertaintyorientation,motivationand cognition.
In R. M. Sorrentino& E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivationand cognition:
Foundations of social behavior(Vol. 1, pp. 379-403). New York:GuilfordPress.

905

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
van den Berg and Ros
Span, B., & van Veldhuizen, G. A. (1985). Het gebruik van instrumenten van het
betrokkenheidsmodel in het onderzoek ter evaluatie van het activeringsproces
basisschool [The use of instrumentsfrom the concerns-based adoption model in
research to evaluate the primary-schoolactivationprocess]. Pedagogisch Tifdschrift,
10, 190-199.
Van de Grift,W., & Houtveen, T. (1988). De betrokkenheidvan onderwijsgevenden bij
onderwijsvernieuwingen:Verslagvan een onderzoek [Concernsof teachersin educa-
tional innovations:Reportof research].Pedagogisch Tijdschrift,13, 12-22.
van den Berg, R. (1993). The concerns-basedadoption model in the Netherlands,Flanders
and the United Kingdom:State of the art and perspective. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 19, 51-63.
van den Berg, R., & Sleegers, P. (1995). The innovative capacity of schools in secondary
education. InternationalJournal of QualitativeStudiesin Education, 9, 201-223.
van den Berg,R.,&Vandenberghe,R.(1981). Onderwijsinnovatie in verschuivendperspectief
[Educationalinnovation in shiftingperspective].Tilburg,the Netherlands:Zwijsen.
van den Berg, R., & Vandenberghe,R. (Eds.). (1995). Wegenvan Betrokkenheid:Reflecties
op onderwijsvernieuwig[Waysof being concerned: Reflectionson educationalinno-
vation].Tilburg,the Netherlands:Zwijsen.

Manuscriptreceived September9, 1997

Revision received June 29, 1998
Accepted March22, 1999

906

This content downloaded from [Link] on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 [Link] PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions