Are teachers really change resistant?
Friday, June 5, 2015 at 05:52AM In a great post, IMHO or Why Give Constructive Criticism, Kathy Schrock writes:
As I read along in a chapter about change, I came across the line. “Everyone knows that teachers, especially, are resistant to change.” Hold on! This book was written for educators– why dis' them in the text? And who is “everyone” and why are teachers more resistant to change than anyone in a different profession?
Kathy's question brought me up short. A pretty common complaint among tech "enthusiasts" is that teachers really don't want to try new things. I suspect for many there is an unspoken judgement that this means teachers are cowardly, lazy, or smug. Were they not one of these things, shouldn't they want to change?
I don't have a lot of experience outside of education, having worked in (mostly) public schools for my whole career. But my best guess is teachers are no more or less change resistant than those in any field and I base this knowing that the "Diffusion of Innovation" model has been around for over 50 years and was not based on the teaching profession, but agriculture change practices. The profession falls along this curve with those who are enthusiastic about change working beside the "rocks."
Rogers Bell Curve of the Adoption Cycle
As widely accepted as this model is, shouldn't we conclude that all professions have practitioners within them that fall in each section of the curve. Doctors, farmers, engineers, homemakers, librarians, and truck drivers all have innovators and laggards in their respective fields?
Among my tech director colleagues I see both resisters and innovators as well. Just because one is in the technology field doesn't mean that he or she is a big change agent. (Any of your schools still using GroupWise for email?)
Unwarranted assumptions about any profession to me seems counter productive. Thanks, Kathy, for making me think about this a bit...
Reader Comments (3)
Some years ago I had a conversation with a geologist/seismologist who described what happened in geophysics when empirical data came pouring in that confirmed something we now take for granted: the Theory of Plate Tectonics. According to the geologist of my conversation, it brought on a rash of retirements and angry departures from the field by those who could not adapt. But for most geoscientists it was a red-letter day of celebration.
I agree with you, there is nothing so different about teachers from other professionals. As someone who makes his living asking teachers to do new things, I think we set our personal expectations of others based on our personal risk assessment. For me, change carries very little risk, and can be very stimulating. For teachers operating under very different conditions and organizational expectations, change never comes without consequences of some kind, and the stakes are pretty high. On top of that, American teachers are loaded to the gills with work, much of which is uncompensated, and after 10-15-20 years of it, there can be little energy left for that kind of excitement. That is one feature of the profession that differs substantially from other professions, and something we shouldn't lightly brush aside.
This is such a great post! As part of a group of teachers working on teaching a soon to be adapted set of science standards I have seen this resistance to change. I really enjoyed reading your thoughts.
Are teachers resistant to change OR are they simply resistant to the kinds of 'top-down', 'one size fits all' type of change that seems to be constantly happening in education? Professionals in all fields can embrace change when it gives them and the people they serve (in this case students) agency. Often however the changes happening actually limit the amount of agency teachers have to operate as professionals which makes them dubious about any change that is happening.