Level of Concern Survey

Nicole Hargreaves
11-6-2016

Level of Concern Survey Link:

https://docs.google.com/a/csuglobal.edu/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfmKfMBoyCy9sapDz9W
FQfyUemIJFL9g-RIylyw0abLyXONzg/viewform
The survey that I created is intended to measure three different areas within
implementation. Questions 1 and 2 are designed to look the teachers opinions of
the approach. Question 3 is designed to see how and if this approach is being
implemented in the classroom and questions 4 and 5 are designed to see what
further help and training is needed. Because my answers are in three separate
groupings, they will be assessed separately. The results obtained from questions 1
and 2 will tell me which teachers are onboard with the new change and those who
are not and then I can provide the necessary support to those who are still skeptical.
The information from question 3 will allow me to see who is implementing the
program and at what level. From this I will be able to determine which teachers may
need more resources and trainings on implementation. Finally questions 4 and 5 will
provide me with what resources and next steps the teachers need. This will allow
me to see what support the teachers want and need in order to better implement
the new approach.
The data that I get from each questions will be determined based on the
written responses to each question. Each answer will be assessed using the scale
that is listed in chapter 4 of Implementing Change through Learning. The scale
will provide me with a level of each participant and from there I can determine what
type of support is needed. After assessing each answer based on the scale, I will be
able to create and individualized profile for each teacher. This profile will allow me
to address their concerns through consultation, study groups and open discussion
sessions.
After rating the teachers responses, they will fall within one of 4 Typical
Expressions of Concerns (Hord and Roussin, 2013 p. 102) impact, task, self and
unrelated. The teachers that fall in the unrelated stage have no concern for the
implementation and have given it little thought. I will group them with the teachers
that fall in the self-stage who are concerned with the affects it will have on them or
just want to know more information. I will address these concerns by first consulting
with these teachers and informing them of the changes being made. According to
Managing Change: The Japanese Model, consultation is the first step to promoting
change If a decision has to be made then the people affected by that decision are
consulted. The Japanese ringisystem emphasizes the need to circulate new
proposals or ideas for policy or procedural changes throughout the circle of those
affected, in order for full consultation, understanding and consensus to take place
before implementation is attempted (nemawashi). Though this might be timeconsuming it does ensure that, as far as possible, matters are right first time
(Morrison, 1998 p. 51.) What this model proposes is that any party involved in the
change needs to be consulted first. This allows them time to understand the
reasons for the change before the change is implemented. Although in my scenario
the change has already been implemented, the teachers who score in this category

have not put it in their classroom. This tells me that they need to be better informed
on the new program and the affects it will have on them. I will provide this better
understanding through discussions of the program, professional development and
mentor teachers.
The next stage of teachers fall into the task stage. In this stage the teachers
are concerned with the amount of time that it is taking to implement this new
program. They are implementing it into their classrooms but are still struggling with
understanding it fully and are spending a lot of their valuable time trying to figure
the new program out. For these teachers, I want to provide them tools and supports
that will help them save time. At this stage of concern, teachers are willing to put in
the work and I dont want to take any more of their time. Instead I want to allow
them the opportunity to better understand the program and collaborate with other
teachers in order to save them time. I will do this by providing a study group for
these teachers where they can share ideas and learn from one another. The idea of
a study group came from a book called Aligning whole-faculty study groups with
staff development standards. In this book there is a district called Tigerville, this
district is going through a curriculum change and many teachers are resistant to the
change. They found that allowing teachers an hour a week to collaborate with one
another reduced their resistance and led to better adoption of the program.
Another effect study groups had on teachers in Tigerville was the opportunity to
collaborate with their colleagues. Teachers throughout the district believed that
study groups provided time that was not available in prior schedules to work
with their peers on curriculum integration and cross-curricular projects (Murphy,
2007 p. 55.) This study showed that if teachers are invested in the change than the
collaboration within the study group will provide them with more focus and in turn
give them more time. Because those teachers at the task stage are invested
already but struggle with the time it takes, study groups are the perfect
intervention.
The final group of teachers is the impact group. These teachers have
concerns about the affect this program has on their classroom, how other teachers
are implementing it and they may have ideas about how to better implement this
program. For these teachers I would use open discussion sessions. This approach is
similar to the one used with those teachers in the unrelated and self-stages but
instead of focusing on awareness, the focus is on consensus. According to
Managing Change-The Japanese Model There is considerable emphasis on cooperative and collaborative approaches, consensus-forming rather than conflictual
decision-making. At Honda, for example, any employee, from the most junior to the
most senior can call for an open discussion session a waigaya session (Goss et al.,
1996: 1367). The principles of procedure here are that people speak openly and
frankly about problems and that nothing is excluded from the discussions. Goss et
al. (ibid.) suggest that the waigaya session regards disagreement and problemairing as the starting point of learning, harnessing conflict for everybody's good

disagreeing without being disagreeable. ( Morrison, 1998 p. 51.) Open discussion

sessions allow the participants to have a voice and state their concerns. This
creates an atmosphere where all people are heard and creates a more collaborative
community. In this model the teachers will be able to have their concerns be heard
and it will allow me to better understand their point of view and give suggestions to
help. This open discussion will also allow the teachers to hear others perspectives
and see how it is being implemented throughout the school. The teachers who are
in the impact group have many concerns about what affect this program may have.
By voicing those concerns they will feel heard and at the same time the concerns
can be addressed. They can also understand what their peers are doing and see the
positive effect it is having in classrooms.
As I implement the Responsive Classroom Approach I will need some
assistance. The RCA is not a curriculum and because of that there are little
materials that need to be ordered. However, I will need support through personnel.
In order for this implementation to work, I will need a teacher leader to help with
planning and guide discussions. It would also be useful to have the time to allow
teachers to observe classrooms with RCA. I would need a substitute to cover a half
day in each classroom. These resources will be crucial in supporting with the
implementation.
When implementing a new program it is important to know all of the different
levels teachers will be on. Through the results of my survey, I will address each
teachers individual needs through consultation, study groups and open discussion.

References:
Morrison, K. (1998). Managing change: the japanese model. In Management theories for
educational change(pp. 43-71). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781446219300.n3
Murphy, M. (2007). Aligning whole-faculty study groups with staff development standards. In L. W.
Dale & M. U. Carlene (Eds.), The whole-faculty study groups fieldbook: Lessons learned and best
practices from classrooms, districts, and schools (pp. 16-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781483329116.n3
Shirley M. Hord and James L. Roussin (2013). Implementing Change Through Learning, ConcernsBased Concepts, Tools, and Strategies for Guiding Change.