Support and Sabotage Principals’ Influence on Middle School Teachers’ Responses to Differentiation

Abstract

In order to respond to the growing academic diversity in classrooms, teachers must recognize that their students have different needs and commit to differentiating instruction accordingly; however, the relationship between teachers’ willingness and ability to differentiate instruction and principals’ attitudes toward differentiation is unknown. In this qualitative study, the principals and faculty at three schools were interviewed and observed over the course of 3 years. The results suggested that principals played a key role in teachers’ willingness and ability to differentiate instruction. Principals successful in encouraging teachers to differentiate exhibited the critical support, desire for change, belief that change was possible, and long-term vision of implementation that teachers required in order to effectively differentiate in their classrooms.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allan

S. D.

(1991). Ability grouping research reviews: What do they say about grouping and the gifted? Educational Leadership, 48(6), 60–65.

Bandura

(1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Berliner

(1988). The development of expertise in pedagogy. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED298122)

Bloomer

(2001). Young lives, learning and transformation: Some theoretical considerations. Oxford Review of Education, 27, 429–449.

Brighton

C. M.

(2001). Internal factors that influence teacher change: Teachers' beliefs and conceptions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Brighton

Hertberg

Callahan

Tomlinson

Moon

(2005). The feasibility of high-end learning in a diverse middle school (Research Monograph 05210). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Eccles

J. S.

Wigfield

(1997). Young adolescent development. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED427847)

Elmore

Peterson

McCarthy

(1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning and school organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Erickson

(1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In Wittrock

(Ed.), Handbook on research in teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.

10.

Fletcher

T. V.

Bos

C. S.

Johnson

L. M.

(1999). Accommodating English language learners with language and learning disabilities in the general education classroom. Learning Disabilities: Research and Practice, 14, 80–91.

11.

Fullan

(1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College.

12.

Fullan

(1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational change. London: Falmer.

13.

George

P. S.

Alexander

W. N.

(1993). The exemplary middle school (2nd ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

14.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine DeGruyter.

15.

Gold

B. A.

(1999). Punctuated legitimacy: A theory of teacher change. Teachers College Record, 101, 192–219.

16.

Hall

G. E.

(1985, April). A stages of concern approach to teacher preparation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED265126)

17.

Hertberg

H. L.

(2003). The influence of training on eighth grade writing instructors' responses to the needs of advanced writers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

18.

Hertberg

H. L.

Brighton

C. M.

(2005). Room to improve. Journal of Staff Development, 26(4), 42–47.

19.

Jenkins

Jewell

Leicester

O'Connor

R. E.

Jenkins

Troutner

N. M.

(1992). Accommodations for individual differences without classroom ability groups: An experiment in school restructuring. Exceptional Children, 60, 344–359.

20.

Kulik

J. A.

Kulik

C. C.

(1992). Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 73–77.

21.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

22.

McEwin

K. C.

Dickinson

T. S.

Jenkins

D. M.

(1996). America's middle schools: Practices and progress. A 25-year perspective. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED396842)

23.

Moon

T. R.

Brighton

C. M.

Callahan

C. M.

(2003). The influences of state testing programs on elementary teachers and students. Roeper Review, 25, 49–60.

24.

Moon

T. R.

Callahan

C. M.

Brighton

C. M.

Hertberg

H. L.

Tomlinson

C. A.

Esperat

(2004). School characteristics inventory: Investigation of a quantitative instrument for measuring the modifiability of school contexts for implementation of educational innovations. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 177–206.

25.

Moon

T. R.

Callahan

C. M.

Tomlinson

C. A.

Miller

E. M.

(2002). Middle school classrooms: Teachers' reported practices and students' perceptions. NAGC Research Briefs. Washington, DC: National Association for Gifted Children.

26.

Moon

T. R.

Tomlinson

C. A.

Callahan

C. M.

(1995). Academic diversity in the middle school: Results from a national survey of middle school administrators and teachers (Research Monograph No. 95124). Storrs, CT: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

27.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Profile of children in U.S. School Districts (NCES 96-831). Retrieved October 25, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/96831.pdf

28.

National Middle School Association and National Association for Gifted Children. (2005, January). Meeting the needs of high-ability and high-potential learners in the middle grades. (Joint Position Statement). Retrieved November 18, 2005, from http://www.nmsa.org/AboutNMSA/PositionStatements/GiftedChildren/tabid/119/Default.aspx

29.

Oakes

(1985). Keeping track. New Haven: Yale University Press.

30.

Pate

P. E.

Homestead

E. R.

McGinnis

K. L.

(1997). Making integrated curriculum work: Teachers, students, and the quest for coherent curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.

31.

Patton

M. Q.

(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

32.

Rogers

K. B.

(1993). Grouping the gifted and talented. Roeper Review, 16, 8–12.

33.

Slavin

R. E.

(1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60, 471–499.

34.

Steiner

(2000). Comprehensive school reform: A review of the research literature on scaling up in education. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved November 3, 2005, from http://www.ncrel.org/csri/resources/scaling/review.htm

35.

Sternberg

R. J.

(2000). Making school reform work: A mineralogical theory of school modifiability. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

36.

Strauss

A. L.

Corbin

(1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

37.

Tomlinson

C. A.

(1995). Gifted learners and the middle school: Problem or promise? Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED386832)

38.

Tomlinson

C. A.

(2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

39.

Tyack

Cuban

(1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge: Harvard University.

40.

Yin

R. K.

(1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.