APPLICATION OF CBAM IN EDUCATION

THE APPLICATIONS OF THE CONCERNS-BASED ADOPTION MODEL (CBAM) IN EDUCATIONAna Butler

IntroductionThe Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) evolved from the work of Frances Fuller in 1969. Later, it was more fully developed by Hall & Hord (1987) and used as a framework for understanding and planning educational change (Evans & Chauvin, 1993). Since then, it has been used as a tool for analyzing the implementation of innovations in schools and classrooms. CBAM was designed to measure and facilitate change among teachers. The model is structured in three categories: Stages of Concern (SoC), Levels of Use (LoU), and Innovation Configurations (IC). Each stage consists of methods to gather, observe, and evaluate data that tracks how classroom teachers are handling the progress of the implementation. During the first category, SoC, teachers are observed and interviewed for evaluating their feelings, behaviors, and concerns regarding the implantation during each stage. These Stages of Concern include: Stage 0, Awareness, Stage 1, Informational, Stage 2, Personal, Stage 3, Management, Stage 4, Consequence, Stage 5, Collaboration, and Stage 6, Refocusing. In the next category, Levels of Use, there are specific levels consisting of the following, starting with level 0: Nonuse, Orientation, Preparation, Mechanical, Routine use, Refinement, Integration, and Renewal. These levels track progress of the actions taken in regards to implementing the innovation. This progress is measured mainly in actions taken, habits developed, and classroom delivery patterns evolving. As part of continuing the tracking progress, the Innovations Category features the analysis of data, such as surveys, interviews, and/or observations (Anderson, 1997). The structure of CBAM is complex and consists of different stages and levels, all developed to track concerns, behaviors, and progress of implementation.Furthermore, to measure SoC, the Stages of Concerns Questionnaire (SoC Q) was developed. This 35-item questionnaire measures teacher concerns using self-assessment. The Levels of Use Interview measures Levels of Use of the innovation. Finally, teacher profiles are created based on answers given on the questionnaire and interviews conducted. These profiles are used as tools in developing interventions targeting each concern (Evans & Chauvin, 1993). As each teacher profile is studied and plans developed for support, the profiles are then re-evaluated and adjusted as teachers progress through the implementation process.The Concerns Based Adoption Model has been applied across the years, in various schools, and in relation to a variety of innovations. By following three important concepts throughout its application, the model has had great success in the implementation process of innovations. First, as individuals progress through the stages of concerns, change is no longer viewed as an event, but as a process. Therefore, it must be treated as a process with regards to following a set of steps and ongoing evaluation and support, leading to successful implementation. Second, there are three factors that influence teachersexperience, attitude and the perception of the impact that the application can make. And third, educational administrators, principals, heads of departments and teachers are all change facilitators, and therefore they are the primary factors in the success or failure of the educational innovation. There are some challenges that can still hinder the successful application of this model. However, once these challenges can be addressed, implementation can occur smoothly and effectively. These challenges mainly involve defining terms. Implementation is subjective and therefore implementation does not necessarily mean equal delivery of an innovation as has been widely assumed in the past. Before setting on the journey of change, terms must be clearly defined so, as the process of change begins, progress toward a clear goal can be measured and analyzed.Change is a ProcessAs a general rule, change is approached with anxiety and feelings of uncertainty. Therefore, change is looked at as the alien invading a stable and consistent environment. Past research (Evan and Chauvin, 1993; Hall, 2010) has shown that teachers tend to be resistant when it comes to implementing innovations in the classroom. The innovation tends to disturb the comfort level status quo. And so the change becomes an event, with the focus on the effects the change would reveal. However, as the innovation becomes implemented, change begins to take the role of a process that consists of specific actions taken in order to achieve a particular end result. This ideas of change as a process implies that there are gradual steps in the change process, and that faculty members involved in efforts to improve their teaching, as well as the faculty developers who work with them, progress through natural, predictable stages of concern (Evans & Chauvin, 1993, p. 167). As participants progress through these stages of change, they begin to adjust their way of thinking and doing. Each stage brings new emotions, opinions, and actions that are adjustable throughout the whole process. Hall (2010) agrees with this concept when he makes the claim that becoming confident and competent with an innovation is a developmental process that takes time. Instead of thinking of change in terms of adoption, change should be looked upon as an implementation process. As Bailey and Palsha (1992) suggest, change is ongoing and mediated by behaviors toward the change. Looking at the change process as a complex implementation process sets the stage for participants to embrace the step-like structure of the process.Similarly, in the study conducted by Evans & Chauvin (1993), the stages of CBAM are looked upon as the gradual steps participants follow in the process of change. The stages follow a pattern that starts with self-concerns, moves to task oriented concerns, and ends with impact oriented ideas. They point out that self- concerns are relatively high in the early stages and focused on gaining information about the innovation and finding out how it will affect an individual personally. This is a natural affect according to Saunders (2012), as she points out that change is a personal experience that takes time, provokes emotional and behavioral responses, and is made by the individual and not the organization. By stage three however, concerns are still exhibited in the first areas, but learning how to manage the innovation and incorporating it into their routines in efficient manner is primary. Similarly, stage four shifts concerns to focus on the impact of the innovation. Therefore the claim is made that the process of change occurs over time and as individuals move through the different stages of changes, they experience a range of feelings as they display a combination of concerns simultaneously. The process of change is developed by moving through these specific stages, eliminating concerns along the way, and transitioning to actions of implementation that lead to desirable student outcomes.Teachers Levels of Experience Influence the Process of ImplementationSeveral research reviews, as discussed below, have addressed the patterns that emerge when looking at beginning teachers versus experienced teachers and their level of concerns. Evans & Chauvin (1993) make the claim that beginning teachers tend to be more concerned about things that involve their comfort level, skills and how others perceive their ability and delivery of material. Beginning teachers tend to have more feelings about self and the impact the innovation is having on how they deliver the material as well as their level of skill. While more experienced teachers expressed concerns external to them and involving their students progress and learning. Experienced teachers tend to have more confidence in their role as a teacher and therefore turn their concerns towards the ability of their students. Along those same lines, Hollingsheads (2009) study also makes the claim regarding concerns of beginning teachers often being related to how they identify with their new role as teachers. New teachers tend to have feelings of anxiety and high levels of concerns regarding their own ability, skill, and intelligence level to fill their role as a successful teacher. The same principles then apply to implementing any new change, whether a beginning or experienced teacherthe can I implement this successfully? concern. Hollingshead (2009) identified the differences in concerns based on level of experience by gathering data and creating teacher profiles. The different teacher profiles showed the level of intensity regarding each concern. A closer look at the profiles indicated that different interventions had to be individualized to meet specific needs. For example, beginning teachers would need a different level of support than experienced teachers. According to Hollingshead a one-size-fits-all approach to responding to concerns is not enough to sustain the change initiative. Therefore, principals and district administrators must differentiate interventions for each teacher profile. Similarly the study conducted by Christou, Eliphotou-Menon & Philippou (2004) suggests that overall teaching experience is an important factor in meeting the needs of teaching concerns and therefore developing teacher profiles based on level of concerns, behaviors during implementation, and level of experience facilitates a higher level of support. Beginning teachers will tend to have concerns that are more task-oriented, while experienced teachers concerns are related to the consequences the innovation would have on their students (Christou et al., 2004). Based on these teacher profiles, plans of action can be set into place that address those self-concerns of beginning teacher, boosting confidence, and then progressing to plans that involve classroom environment and student outcomes. Change Facilitators serve as Primary Tools in Success or Failure of InnovationKeeping in mind that teacher concerns play a vital role in the implementation of an innovation, CBAM attempts to use these concerns in developing an appropriate approach to implementation. The innovation generally begins at the administration level and moves down to the teacher level. Throughout this process, the participants involved become the change facilitators that react to the innovation either in positive or negative ways. These change facilitators can be principals, curriculum specialists, coaches, lead teachers, and classroom teachers. According to the study by Roach, Kratochwill, and Frank (2009) change facilitators are not just the leaders that push for the innovation to be implemented. Rather, change facilitators are those involved with the implementation and their behavior and actions become primary tools in implementation. These change facilitators need to be supported and nurtured throughout the process of change in order for successful implementation to occur. In the study regarding the implementation of the SAIL approach, the authors explore the role of each individual involved with the innovation and the level of impact based on their level of involvement. Ideally, in order for successful implementation to take place, all participants involved in the implementation move through the steps of the change process together. Unfortunately, that is not always the case. Often, in the educational system, decisions are made at the administration level and then expected to be implemented with positive results by those in the classroom. Throughout the application of these expectations there may be little support as leaders on the developmental side, such as policymakers, often lose interest once development is done and implementation began. They are ready to move on to the next initiative which frequently leads to loss of support for the implementation of the first initiative (ERAS, 2013, p. 10). Without the support of facilitators, teachers struggle to understand and apply the educational innovation. As Pedron & Evans (1990) point out, teachers acceptance of an innovation is unlikely to develop if the advancement of the innovation depends solely on them. Turks and Weller (2009) also make this same claim when they point out that changing teacher practice typically involves staff development training while presenting new ideas to be implemented (p. 162). And similarly Hall (2010) agrees by stating that one important factor in the success of an implementation is the level of involvement from the principal. Providing leadership, support, and resources correlates with the success of teacher implementation. Although with collaboration, teachers can help each other respond to some of the concerns, it is difficult to nurture the change when concerns are high at the same levels. It becomes more of a venting outlet, rather than facilitating successful implementation. In contrast, when facilitators make an effort to serve as an ongoing resource in the process of implementing change, teachers have can develop the confidence and competence needed to use that particular innovation.According to the study by C. Paul Newhouse (2001), those implementing the change reflect the strengths and concerns of the innovation. The SoC and LoU levels focus on the implementer. As these concerns are analyzed and addressed, each stage brings the change facilitator closer to comfort and confidence regarding the innovation. As self-concerns are addressed about teachers worries regarding their ability to perform, confidence builds and teachers move to the impact concerns that bring about apprehension concerning student outcomes. With confidence boosted, and apprehension dissolved, change facilitators can begin the process of examining tasks and teaching duties using the innovation. All of these behaviors, emotions, and actions are exhibited by those who are involved with the change. Without the change facilitator, the implementation would not exist. This type of evidence is supported in Andersons study (1997) where he makes the claim that CBAM theory assumes that classroom change can be facilitated, and that the individuals involved in the change must take on new roles as change facilitators. The Concerns-Based Adoption Model provides the framework needed for applying diagnostic procedures and implementation methods, not to the innovation, but rather to those implementing it. The innovation can often be the same across grades, curriculum, and schools; however, those implementing the innovation are the change facilitators contributing their unique feelings, behaviors, and styles in reference to the change. He also points out that change facilitators have different roles, such as external versus internal change facilitators, all contributing to the implementation of the innovation. Therefore, a principal or administrator would be an external facilitator, while a teacher would be an internal facilitator. Implications of Successful ImplementationAs much as CBAM has improved the facilitation process of implementing an innovation, there are some implications that have yet to be resolved. The Educational Research Association of Singapore presented an article in which a study was conducted involving the implementation of the SAIL approach in mathematics classrooms. As a result of this study, a couple of implications were encountered. First, implementation success is an elusive concept (ERAS, 2013, p. 19). Therefore, before proceeding any further, the word implementation must first be defined. According to this article, there are several assumptions about what implementation means. One may view an implementation simply as delivery of the innovation in the classroom. While another, defines implementation as a result of visible effects and behaviors regarding the innovation. Therefore, before making an assumption of what implementation looks like, the term must be defined. Once the term implementation has a clear definition, the term successful can be added and defined as well. In order to measure whether the implementation was indeed successful, change facilitators must define it. Only then, can the level of implementation be measured and analyzed to determine its success. Following defining these terms, change facilitators conduct ongoing monitoring of the implementation and analyzing its progression along the way to successful implementation. Along those lines, The SAIL approach study stressed the importance of asking the right questions at the right time, and being aware of each stage of implementation so that appropriate interventions can be applied throughout the process (ERAS, 2013). This is very important because often policy makers tend to adopt and implement innovations based on their own concerns, goals and objectives (ERAS, 2013, p. 22). When these objectives dont match teachers concerns, schools are faced with an imbalance in the change process. Longitudinal studies should be conducted to track each implementation and careful analysis of each stage. ConclusionThe journey of change is complicated and challenging. The difficulty in accomplishing the change often lies in the lack of vision or good ideas about what to do. The Concerns-Based Adoption Model provides analysis of teacher concerns and behaviors, and tracks changes in the levels of implementation in order for appropriate support to be administered. Several points must be considered in order for the application of CBAM to serve as a successful tool while implementing long lasting change. First, when implementing an innovation, the change must be treated as a process, so that data can be gathered, analysis performed, and interventions developed at each stage. All of this is done while taking in consideration teachers feelings and attitudes, as well as their level of teaching experience. When interventions are developed, they may look different depending on the stage of concern and the level of use. At the beginning stages, the self-concern stages, interventions are developed that address teachers apprehension about their own ability to administer change in the classroom. As teachers move through the impact concerns, interventions change to reflect support with student outcomes. And when the concerns are high at the task level, interventions are developed to support teachers in the daily duties of successfully implementing the innovation. All of these interventions can be clearly seen when facilitators develop teacher profiles that show where the concerns are most high. Teachers do not necessarily follow the progression of self-concerns first, followed by impact concerns, and ending with task concerns. The levels can be high at any stage during the process or in more than one stage. However, there tends to be a pattern of high level self-concerns for beginning teachers, while more experienced teachers battle higher levels at the impact concern stage. Regardless of experience or stage, teachers become the change facilitators and therefore play key roles in the implementation of any innovation. Furthermore, these change facilitators mold the way the innovation is being implemented and hence they need ongoing monitoring and support, as they progress through the different stages of the CBAM program. As discussed in this literature review, CBAM does not monitor the innovation itself, but rather those implementing it. As Tunks and Weller (2009) stated, CBAM is a tool providing cues and guidance during the process of implementation by tracking behaviors, feelings, and reactions of the change facilitators. Consequently, without these change facilitators, implementation cannot occur. Professional development must be differentiated to create teacher efficacy, meaning strategies must be matched to specific stages as well as specific individuals. Using this approach benefits the progress of the change process and enhances the possibility of sustainable change. The available literature reviewed points out that there are still some implications in the application of the CBAM program. These implications include the absence of clear definitions of some terms. One key term needing a clear definition in all of the studies mentioned above is implementation. Implementation can take different forms, from simply delivering something in to the classroom, to a meaningful use or application of that thing. Before progress can be measured on the implementation of any one innovation, this term must clearly be defined. Another key term to be defined is the term successful, when used in the contents of successful implementation. In order to measure whether the CBAM approach facilitated in the successful implementation of an innovation, success needs to have a clear interpretation understood by all those involved in facilitating the change. Without having these concrete definitions, implementation becomes elusive and difficult to diagnose. As studies continue to develop on the application of CBAM, thought should be given to clearly defining these terms.As I began my exploration of the application of the Concerns-Based Adoption Model, I especially paid close attention to common themes among available research. The points described above were universal throughout the literature I read, and answered my inquiry of the effects that the application of CBAM has on the implantation process of innovations. I quickly gained insight into the notion that the model was not developed to assess the innovation, but rather those implementing it, allowing them to progress through the stages at their own pace and forming their own patterns. Starting with the idea that change is a process, involving particular steps and stages, and ending with teachers playing key roles as changing facilitators in the implementation process, brings me to the conclusion that CBAM is a comprehensive tool that assists in facilitating successful implementation of any innovation in the classroom.

ReferencesAnderson, S. E. (1997). Understanding teacher change: Revisiting the Concerns BasedAdoption Model. Curriculum Inquiry, 27, 331-367. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1180105?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21105286836883Bailey Jr., D. B., & Palsha, S. A. (1992). Qualities of the Stages of Concern Questionnaire and Implications for Educational Innovations. Journal Of Educational Research, 85(4), 226.Christou, C., Eliophotou-Menon, M., & Philippou, G. (2004). Teachers' concerns regardingadoption of a new mathematics curriculum: An application of CBAM. Educational Studies In Mathematics, 57(2), 157-176.Educational Research Association of Singapore. (2013). Using CBAM (Concerns-BasedAdoption Model) to understand the implementation of the SAIL approach. Retrieved from http://www.eras.org.sg/papers/1-2-13.pdfEvans, L., & Chauvin, S. (1993). Faculty developers as change facilitators: The concerns-based adoption model. To Improve the Academy. 12, 165-178. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1277&context=podimproveacadHall, G. E. (2010). Technology's Achilles Heel: Achieving High-Quality Implementation. Journal Of Research On Technology In Education (International Society For Technology In Education),42(3), 231-263.Hollingshead, B. (2009). The Concerns-Based Adoption Model: A Framework for Examining Implementation of a Character Education Program.NASSP Bulletin,93(3), 166-183. doi:10.1177/0192636509357932Newhouse, C. (2001). Applying the Concerns-Based Adoption Model to Research on Computers in Classrooms.Journal Of Research On Computing In Education,33(5), 1-21.Pedron, N. A., & Evans, S. B. (1990). Modifying Classroom Teachers' Acceptance of theConsulting Teacher Model. Journal Of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 1(2), 189.Roach, A. T., Kratochwill, T. R., & Frank, J. L. (2009). School-Based Consultants as ChangeFacilitators: Adaptation of the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) to Support the Implementation of Research-Based Practices. Journal Of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 19(4), 300-320. doi:10.1080/10474410802463304Saunders, R. (2012). Assessment of professional development for teachers in the vocationaleducation and training sector: An examination of the Concerns Based Adoption Model. Australian Journal Of Education (ACER Press), 56(2), 182-204.Tunks, J., & Weller, K. (2009). Changing practice, changing minds, from arithmetical toalgebraic thinking: an application of the concerns-based adoption model (CBAM).Educational Studies In Mathematics, 72(2), 161-183. doi:10.1007/s10649-009-9189-x

13