Administrator as a Change Leader: Concept @ Work

Elementary School Engaged in Implementing Differentiated Instruction

Three teachers and the principal attended district meetings to receive training and resources on differentiation. One of the teachers was hired to teach half-time and coach half-time at the elementary school.

The role of the coach was to facilitate the study, planning, and implementation of differentiation instruction per grade level. Every three weeks the coach would work with all the teachers per grade level for a half-day on Friday. Then the following week the coach would do follow-up by going into each classroom to model a lesson, observe and provide feedback to the teacher, or work with a group of students in the classroom. Then after school on Thursday of that week, the grade level teachers would all meet with the coach to debrief what had happened in the classrooms. This allowed the teachers to receive on-going professional development at the school site during the first year of implementation.

Theory of Change

The principal and coach also attended district training on how to evaluate professional development. A theory of change and assumptions were developed to provide the big picture of the professional development program on differentiation as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Theory of Change and Assumptions for Implementation of a Professional Development Program on Differentiation

Tomlinson (2000) states that differentiation is a way of thinking about teaching and learning and is based on a set of beliefs. She states that:

Differentiation suggests that you can challenge all learners by providing materials and tasks on the standard at varied levels of difficulty, with varying degrees of scaffolding, through multiple instructional groups, and with time variations. Further, differentiation suggests that teachers can craft lessons in ways that tap into multiple student interests to promote heightened learner interest in the standard. Teachers can encourage student success by varying ways in which students work: alone or collaboratively, in auditory or visual modes, or through practical or creative means (Tomlinson, p. 9).

Levels of Use

Thirty-two teachers (n = 32) were interviewed by a certified trained Levels of Use interviewer. The data were analyzed to identify the Levels of Use. Table 1 identifies the behaviors and patterns of use of differentiated instruction according to the number and percent of teachers at each Level of Use.

Table 1. Results of Levels of Use for Teachers (n = 32)




Level of Use	Number	Percent





Mechanical	5	16%



Routine	14	44%



Refinement	11	34%



Integration	2	6%

Sixteen percent (5) of the teachers were identified at the mechanical level, which means that they know what is expected on a day-to-day basis but tend to have management concerns related to amount of work involved in planning and collaborating. Forty-four percent (14) of the teachers were identified at the routine level, which means the teachers are fairly comfortable with the use of differentiated instruction and have minimal concerns related to management issues. Thirty-four percent (11) were identified at the refinement level, which means the teachers want to continue to explore and experiment with new ideas and materials based on research, information from training sessions, and results of assessment. Six percent (2) of the teachers were identified at the integration level, which indicates making changes based on input from collaboration with colleagues.

Teachers are comfortable acquiring information. They know what resources are available and where to locate the resources as needed. Most teachers meet beyond the designated time with the coach to plan differentiated activities, share ideas and materials, and problem solve. The majority of the teachers are establishing a routine pattern of use of differentiation instruction and basing changes on informal assessment of the impact on students.

The results of these behaviors align with the theory of change, which include planning, sharing, materials available, and coaching. One teacher clearly stated the theory of change in action:

We meet once a month at our grade level. We have read a book and she (coach) brings in articles. We read it there and share how to work it in. Then she (coach) comes into our classrooms. We schedule her to come in. She helps us implement what we have learned and then we meet on Thursday. She meets with us on Thursday. She meets your needs by modeling in the classroom, discussing with us/debriefing after school what went well.

In order to continue to monitor the progress being made toward implementation of differentiated instruction and to make appropriate interventions through on-going professional development, the following are suggestions according to Levels of Use:

Routine Level of Use: These teachers should move toward development and use of IC map (Innovation Configuration map) to determine through observation and reflection where actual use in the classroom aligns with ideal variation of components on an IC map.
Refinement Level of Use: These teachers should use an IC map to determine through observation and reflection where actual use is in the classroom as well as develop assessments, such as rubrics, to use to determine impact on student learning.
Integration Level of Use: The collaboration among teachers within and across grade levels needs to continue to plan lessons, share materials, and assess impact on student learning. This collective focus should be on the impact of students relevant to identified target for student growth as identified in CSIP.

Administrator as a Change Leader

Back