How are we measuring domains that influence teacher readiness for change? A scoping review of existing instruments in non-tertiary settings.
Saved in:
| Title: | How are we measuring domains that influence teacher readiness for change? A scoping review of existing instruments in non-tertiary settings. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Scott, Kate1 (AUTHOR) kparsons1@student.unimelb.edu.au, Dawson, Georgia1 (AUTHOR), Quach, Jon1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Educational Change. Jun2025, Vol. 26 Issue 2, p201-238. 38p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Teacher researchers, *Readiness for school, *Educational change, *Teacher influence, *Research personnel, *Preparedness |
| Abstract: | There is emerging evidence that teachers in non-tertiary educational settings that are "ready for change" are more likely to successfully implement change programs. However, what to measure, and how often to measure, to determine teacher readiness for change remains contested, as does how such data might be used by implementation practitioners, researchers, and educational settings. This review presents the findings of a scoping review conducted in May 2023 that evaluated instruments used to measure teacher readiness for change. For the twenty-eight instruments where the assessment items were available, each instrument was evaluated against the Conceptual Model for Readiness and Factors Affecting readiness for change (CMRFAR) to determine if the four domains of the CMRFAR are included. Additionally, the instruments are reviewed to determine if data is collected at multiple timepoints. This review also examines the fifty-six included studies to determine how often the study collected readiness for change data and how the collected data was utilized. Whilst one comprehensive instrument is identified, the review illustrates that many of the instruments which have been used do not assess all the domains which influence teacher readiness for change. Collected readiness for change data is typically used by researchers to identify barriers and facilitators to readiness for change and/or implementation progress. Additionally, in contradiction of emerging readiness for change best practice, educational researchers commonly collect readiness for change data at a single timepoint. The review proposes an updated model of domains that influence teacher readiness for change, the DIT-RFC. Drawn from evidence outlined in this review, the DIT-RFC recognizes a fifth domain which affects teacher readiness for change, View of Implementation, and presents a model aligned with current terminology and conceptualization of the components of readiness for change. The review concludes that it is likely that educational settings, researchers and implementation practitioners would benefit from the development of a multi-timepoint instrument which includes assessment items across the five domains of the DIT-RFC and can be tailored for common educational change scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Educational Change is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Text: Availability: 1 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 186136451 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: How are we measuring domains that influence teacher readiness for change? A scoping review of existing instruments in non-tertiary settings. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Scott%2C+Kate%22">Scott, Kate</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> kparsons1@student.unimelb.edu.au</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dawson%2C+Georgia%22">Dawson, Georgia</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Quach%2C+Jon%22">Quach, Jon</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+Educational+Change%22">Journal of Educational Change</searchLink>. Jun2025, Vol. 26 Issue 2, p201-238. 38p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+researchers%22">Teacher researchers</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Readiness+for+school%22">Readiness for school</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+change%22">Educational change</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+influence%22">Teacher influence</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+personnel%22">Research personnel</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preparedness%22">Preparedness</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: There is emerging evidence that teachers in non-tertiary educational settings that are "ready for change" are more likely to successfully implement change programs. However, what to measure, and how often to measure, to determine teacher readiness for change remains contested, as does how such data might be used by implementation practitioners, researchers, and educational settings. This review presents the findings of a scoping review conducted in May 2023 that evaluated instruments used to measure teacher readiness for change. For the twenty-eight instruments where the assessment items were available, each instrument was evaluated against the Conceptual Model for Readiness and Factors Affecting readiness for change (CMRFAR) to determine if the four domains of the CMRFAR are included. Additionally, the instruments are reviewed to determine if data is collected at multiple timepoints. This review also examines the fifty-six included studies to determine how often the study collected readiness for change data and how the collected data was utilized. Whilst one comprehensive instrument is identified, the review illustrates that many of the instruments which have been used do not assess all the domains which influence teacher readiness for change. Collected readiness for change data is typically used by researchers to identify barriers and facilitators to readiness for change and/or implementation progress. Additionally, in contradiction of emerging readiness for change best practice, educational researchers commonly collect readiness for change data at a single timepoint. The review proposes an updated model of domains that influence teacher readiness for change, the DIT-RFC. Drawn from evidence outlined in this review, the DIT-RFC recognizes a fifth domain which affects teacher readiness for change, View of Implementation, and presents a model aligned with current terminology and conceptualization of the components of readiness for change. The review concludes that it is likely that educational settings, researchers and implementation practitioners would benefit from the development of a multi-timepoint instrument which includes assessment items across the five domains of the DIT-RFC and can be tailored for common educational change scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of Educational Change is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=186136451 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10833-024-09521-0 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 38 StartPage: 201 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Teacher researchers Type: general – SubjectFull: Readiness for school Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational change Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher influence Type: general – SubjectFull: Research personnel Type: general – SubjectFull: Preparedness Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: How are we measuring domains that influence teacher readiness for change? A scoping review of existing instruments in non-tertiary settings. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Scott, Kate – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Dawson, Georgia – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Quach, Jon IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 06 Text: Jun2025 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 13892843 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 26 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Educational Change Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
