| The response to the plethora of educational reports calling for change has been various waves of reform. Usually, these have been initiated by forces outside the educational system or without consultation of those most affected by the change, namely teachers and students. Minor or short-term changes in some classrooms have been effected, but major and long-lasting change within schools is rare. Despite various barriers to educational change, though, some teachers do implement innovations.;The purpose of this study is to investigate the implementation of a particular innovation, cooperative learning. Two questions are addressed: (1) To what extent do teachers who choose to take a course about the use of cooperative learning implement the innovation? and (2) What factors account for the variation in their use?;Incorporating the cooperative learning model into the classroom is indeed innovative. Students helping other students on a regular basis is usually seen as cheating. To change one's philosophy about where students can obtain information, what the teacher's role is, and what learning looks and sounds like so that it follows the cooperative learning model requires the all-encompassing impact of change.;The extent of use of cooperative learning was defined using four categories: effective users, competent users, marginal users, and nonusers. Differentiation among the categories was based on frequency and quality of use. The results of this study indicate four general factors to account for the variation in use: the role of the principal, the teacher's approach to teaching, the teacher's perceptions of cooperative learning, and the extent of continued involvement in cooperative learning outside one's own classroom.;This study extends the research on change in education in several ways. In general, previous studies concerned with change have focused on change agents rather than teachers, imposed not voluntary change, short-term inservice presentations not longer training through university courses, or on the adoption not the implementation of change. Finally, the research base for cooperative learning in terms of student outcomes is extensive, but no studies focusing on why only some teachers choose to continue their implementation of cooperative learning appear in the literature on change. |
