University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Creating conditions for Teacher Flow: supporting student-centered learning through design of optimal P-12 professional development

(USC Thesis Other)

Creating conditions for Teacher Flow: supporting student-centered learning through design of optimal P-12 professional development

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW 1

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW:
SUPPORTING STUDENT-CENTERED LEARNING THROUGH DESIGN OF OPTIMAL
P-12 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

by

Ginger L. Carlson

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2018

Copyright 2018 Ginger L. Carlson
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

2

DEDICATION
To students and teachers everywhere, who after so many years of glacial movement in education
are suddenly feeling the plates shift. What an exciting time to be a learner!

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
When I first began teaching young children, I became enamored with the gift the world
had found in the author Byrd Baylor, and especially her title The Table Where Rich People Sit.
My favorite line reads, “If all the rulers of the world could get together at a friendly wooden
table in somebody’s kitchen, they would solve their arguments in half the time” (Baylor, 1994, p.
3).
This dissertation was written at our family kitchen table, complete with our own special,
blue, handcrafted plate, often covered with cookie crumbs and other traces of busy family life.
While I was tempted (even encouraged) to sequester myself away for the sake of focus during
this process, I consciously chose to instead make it a part of our everyday family life. That is
what this dissertation is about: finding focus, productivity, achievement, engagement, and joy
amidst distractions, barriers, and other responsibilities. What better place to think deeply, take
risks, make progress, engage, and then offer thanks and acknowledgment than together around
the kitchen table? To the people at my table who helped in the creation of this dissertation:
To my son Zeal, the rarest of all the world’s teenagers. What a blessing to have you at the
table through this process, turning any passive sentence I threw into the air into a masterfully
crafted active one. Thank you for also serving as my personal human thesaurus and always
offering a well-timed (or not) interruption, your special humor, and unique perspective.
To my daughter Anjali. We have always said that you “add the special spice every family
needs.” Thank you, Darling, for keeping this process fun and inspired, the way any good flow
experience should be. You inspire me.
To my husband, Raphael. Through this process these last few years, you have kept our
table full of healthy, home-cooked meals, warmth, laughter, probing questions to make this work
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

4
better, and nourishment on all the levels that exist in this mortal world. The culmination of this
dissertation came right on time. Happy 20
th
anniversary!
My daily professional table is also so bountiful! To Douglas Atkins, thank you for your
vision and getting this ball rolling. To Lissette, Stacey, Tracy, Kim, TK, and Patti. What a true
blessing it is to join with all of you around our “think tank” table each day. It is an honor to be
able to design with all of you, such creative, wise women. Each of you have contributed to the
evolution of this project in unique and important ways. ¡Mil gracias!
Now we also find ourselves in a new learning paradigm. With blended and social
learning permeating our lives, our table is now no longer bound by the limits of time and space.
To friends and family from afar who have blessed this process and given me strength to
persevere. There are so many of you who make up my community of support. A few have
provided extra love and encouragement through this process:
Gratitude to colleagues who I am grateful to also call dear friends: Donald Wilson, Sarah
Kaldelli, Penny Kynigou, David Nelson, Allyson Rameker. From all separate corners of the
world you offered perspective on the process, support during the especially challenging
moments, insight into the content, and care for my own personal well-being. Sincere gratitude to
each of you.
To my parents, Bill and Sherri Carlson. Family is the foundation of learning, regardless
of where we find ourselves in the world. It almost seems cliché to just say thank you. You are a
zeppelin full of support and I could not have done this work without the two of you.
To my committee: Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores, Dr. Reynaldo Baca, and Dr. Frederick
Freking. I could not have asked for a more straightforward or supportive committee to help guide
this work. Thank you for your questions, your insights, and your expertise. Special thanks to Dr.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

5
Mora-Flores, a most gifted mentor and teacher. Your humble kindness, unwavering support, and
swift and focused feedback are the things we all need a little more of in this world.
Finally, to the entire USC Organizational Change and Leadership Cohort Four. Thank
you all for gathering at this table together. Our collective work around this great globe will
hopefully help take the steps needed to solve the world’s wicked problems of practice in “half
the time.” May you all be blessed in the journey.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................. 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 6
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ 10
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... 12
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. 13
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 14
Introduction to the Problem of Practice .................................................................................. 14
Organizational Context and Mission ...................................................................................... 14
Organizational Performance Status/Need ............................................................................... 15
Related Literature .................................................................................................................... 17
Importance of the Organizational Innovation ......................................................................... 18
Organizational Performance Goal ........................................................................................... 19
Description of Stakeholder Groups ......................................................................................... 20
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ........................................................................................... 20
Stakeholder Group for the Study ............................................................................................ 21
Purpose of the Project and Questions ..................................................................................... 22
Methodological Framework .................................................................................................... 23
Definitions ............................................................................................................................... 24
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................ 26
Nurturing Teacher Flow .......................................................................................................... 26
An Overview of Teacher Satisfaction and Flow in P-12 Schools .......................................... 27
Teacher Stress and Cynicism ............................................................................................ 27
Teachers and stress ........................................................................................................ 27
Teachers and cynicism ................................................................................................... 27
Teacher Well-being and Satisfaction ................................................................................ 28
Teacher ownership of well-being. .................................................................................. 29
Flourishing ..................................................................................................................... 29
Improving Teacher Satisfaction ........................................................................................ 30
Teacher self-efficacy. ..................................................................................................... 30
Teacher passion. ............................................................................................................. 30
Collective teacher pedagogical culture .......................................................................... 31
Flow Concepts in Schools ................................................................................................. 32
Impact of teacher flow on student engagement ............................................................. 33
Academic optimism ....................................................................................................... 33
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

7
Collective flow ............................................................................................................... 33
Flow and development of expertise ............................................................................... 34
Current Trends and Strategies for Teacher Engagement in Professional Development ......... 34
Trends in Approaches to Professional Learning ............................................................... 34
Professional learning communities ................................................................................ 35
Strengths-based approaches to professional learning .................................................... 36
Nature of Leadership in Schools ....................................................................................... 37
Leadership support. ........................................................................................................ 37
Teacher leaders and “teacherpreneurs”. ......................................................................... 37
Challenges in Teacher Engagement Leading to Flow with Professional Learning ................ 38
Time and Professional Development ................................................................................ 38
“Gameful” Professional Learning: Risk-Taking and Spontaneity .................................... 39
Elements of play and professional development ........................................................... 40
Creating challenging tasks ............................................................................................. 40
The Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework ................................................... 41
Knowledge and Skills ....................................................................................................... 42
Knowledge influences. ................................................................................................... 42
Motivation ......................................................................................................................... 48
Self-efficacy theory ........................................................................................................ 48
Expectancy value theory ................................................................................................ 49
Organization ...................................................................................................................... 52
General organization theory. .......................................................................................... 52
Cultural models .............................................................................................................. 53
Cultural settings ............................................................................................................. 54
Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization .............. 61
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 65
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 67
Introduction to the Methodology ............................................................................................ 67
Sampling and Recruitment ...................................................................................................... 68
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 68
Survey Sampling Strategy, Criteria, and Rationale .......................................................... 69
Criterion 1. Hiring classification. ................................................................................... 69
Criterion 2. Teacher leadership. ..................................................................................... 69
Criterion 3. Current teaching level. ................................................................................ 70
Focus Group Sampling Criteria and Rationale ................................................................. 70
Criterion 1. Teacher leadership. ..................................................................................... 71
Criterion 2. Locally-hired teachers ................................................................................ 71
Criterion 3. Overseas-hired teachers. ............................................................................. 72
Focus Group Sampling and Recruitment Strategy and Rationale .................................... 72
Data Collection and Instrumentation ...................................................................................... 73
Surveys .............................................................................................................................. 73
Focus Groups .................................................................................................................... 73
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 74
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

8
Credibility and Trustworthiness .............................................................................................. 75
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 78
Ethics ................................................................................................................................. 79
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 81
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ........................................................................ 83
Participating Stakeholders ...................................................................................................... 84
Survey Participants ........................................................................................................... 84
Focus Group Participants .................................................................................................. 90
Results and Findings ............................................................................................................... 92
Research Question 1 ......................................................................................................... 92
Knowledge ........................................................................................................................ 92
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about professional expectations ...................... 92
Subjective knowledge about expectations based on personal interpretation ................. 93
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about student-centered learning strategies ...... 97
Metacognitive knowledge ............................................................................................ 107
Motivation ....................................................................................................................... 111
Utility value and student-centered learning communication ....................................... 111
Collective self-efficacy ................................................................................................ 113
Intrinsic value. .............................................................................................................. 116
Extrinsic value ............................................................................................................. 117
Organization .................................................................................................................... 119
Organizational identity and continuity. ........................................................................ 120
Conflict and creative friction ....................................................................................... 121
Teacher perceptions about time ................................................................................... 127
Research Question 2 ....................................................................................................... 129
KMO and Teacher Flow ................................................................................................. 130
Support for Flow ............................................................................................................. 132
Flow as an interactive cycle ......................................................................................... 133
Research Question 3 ....................................................................................................... 135
Communication and Organizational Values ................................................................... 135
Communication ............................................................................................................... 135
Goal Setting .................................................................................................................... 136
Content Expertise ............................................................................................................ 138
Synthesis ......................................................................................................................... 140
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 142
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................... 146
Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 146
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ............................................... 148
Knowledge Recommendations ....................................................................................... 149
Declarative knowledge solutions ................................................................................. 153
Procedural knowledge solutions .................................................................................. 156
Metacognitive knowledge solutions ............................................................................ 157
Motivation Recommendations ........................................................................................ 158
Value ............................................................................................................................ 160
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

9
Efficacy ....................................................................................................................... 162
Organization Recommendations ..................................................................................... 162
Cultural model: organizational identity ....................................................................... 166
Cultural model: conflict and creative friction .............................................................. 168
Cultural setting: communication .................................................................................. 169
Cultural setting: teacher support systems .................................................................... 171
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ................................................................... 174
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ................................................................... 174
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations ........................................................... 175
Level Four: Results and Leading Indicators ................................................................... 176
Level Three: Behavior .................................................................................................... 178
Critical behaviors ......................................................................................................... 178
Required drivers ........................................................................................................... 179
Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 182
Level Two: Learning ....................................................................................................... 182
Learning goals .............................................................................................................. 182
Program ........................................................................................................................ 183
Components of learning ............................................................................................... 184
Level One: Reaction ....................................................................................................... 185
Evaluation Tools ............................................................................................................. 186
During and immediately following the program implementation ............................... 187
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. ............................................. 187
Data Analysis and Reporting .......................................................................................... 188
Summary ............................................................................................................................... 189
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 189
References ................................................................................................................................... 191
Appendix A Survey Protocol ...................................................................................................... 203
Appendix B Focus Group Protocol ............................................................................................. 211
Appendix C Informed Consent for Non-Medical Research ....................................................... 215
Appendix D Information/Facts Sheet for Exempt Non-Medical Research ................................ 218
Appendix E Blended Evaluation Tool ........................................................................................ 220

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

10

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Stakeholder Goals ............................................................................................................ 20
Table 2 Knowledge Influences ..................................................................................................... 47
Table 3 Motivation Influences ...................................................................................................... 51
Table 4 Organizational Influences ................................................................................................ 57
Table 5 Grade Level Representation ............................................................................................. 85
Table 6 Subject Area Representation ............................................................................................ 87
Table 7 Number of Years Teaching Represented in Survey Population ...................................... 90
Table 8 Teacher Reported Knowledge About Professional Expectations .................................... 93
Table 9 Teacher Reported Assessment of ISLA as Student-centered Learning Environment ..... 98
Table 10 Teacher Reported Knowledge About Teacher-centered vs. Student-centered Learning
Belief Statements ................................................................................................................ 102
Table 11 Teacher Reported Knowledge About Teacher-centered Learning Belief Statements
Disaggregated by Hiring Classification .............................................................................. 103
Table 12 Teacher Reported Knowledge About What Students Need in their Environment ...... 104
Table 13 Teacher Reported Knowledge About Student Assessment and Goal Setting ............. 105
Table 14 Teacher Reported Metacognitive Awareness and Practice .......................................... 108
Table 15 Teacher Reported Identification of Student-centered Learning Models at ISLA ........ 109
Table 16 Teacher Reported Beliefs about Collective Communication ...................................... 112
Table 17 Teacher Reported Beliefs about Collective Efficacy ................................................... 114
Table 18 Teacher Reported Beliefs about Their Work Relationships ........................................ 115
Table 19 Teacher Reported Acknowledgments and Encouragement ......................................... 117
Table 20 Teacher Reported Feelings about Specific Elements of Perceived Conflict with
Colleagues ........................................................................................................................... 124
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

11
Table 21 Teacher Reported Feelings about Specific Elements of Perceived Conflict with
Administrators ..................................................................................................................... 125
Table 22 Teacher Perception of Time ......................................................................................... 129
Table 23 Teacher Reported Knowledge About Goal Setting ..................................................... 136
Table 24 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 151
Table 25 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ........................................ 159
Table 26 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations .................................... 163
Table 27 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes ....................... 177
Table 28 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ............................. 179
Table 29 Required Drivers to Support Student-centered Learning Practices in Daily Activities
............................................................................................................................................. 180
Table 30 Components of Learning for the Program ................................................................... 184
Table 31 Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ..................................................... 186

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

12
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Stakeholder Knowlegde and Motivation within
Organizational Cultural Models and Settings ....................................................................... 63
Figure 2 Survey Population by Section of the School .................................................................. 85
Figure 3 Hiring Classification of Survey Respondents ................................................................. 88
Figure 4 Language of Instruction .................................................................................................. 88
Figure 5 Teacher Leader Representation ...................................................................................... 89
Figure 6 Focus Group Composition by Section of the School ..................................................... 91
Figure 7 Focus Group Composition by Classification .................................................................. 91
Figure 8 Teacher and Colleague Trust ........................................................................................ 115
Figure 9 Teacher Engagement with Shared Vision .................................................................... 121
Figure 10 Teacher Reported Feelings About Conflict ................................................................ 122
Figure 11 Feelings about Conflict disaggregated by Hiring Classification ................................ 123
Figure 12 Teacher Reported Feelings About Disagreeing with an Administrator ..................... 126
Figure 13 Teacher Reported Feelings About Bringing New Ideas to an Administrator ............ 127
Figure 14 Teacher Reported Feelings About Telling an Administrator They Don’t Know or
Understand Something ........................................................................................................ 127
Figure 15 How often do teachers achieve flow states? ............................................................... 131
Figure 16 How often do teachers feel time is lost or goes by very quickly? .............................. 132
Figure 17 Teacher Reported Beliefs About Support in Achieving Flow States ......................... 133
Figure 18 Confidence in Individual and Team Abilities to Meet Goals ..................................... 137
Figure 19 Teacher Reported Feelings of Encouragement to Develop Content Expertise .......... 139
Figure 20 Sample dashboard to report progress toward goals .................................................... 188

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

13

ABSTRACT
This study applies a combination of learning, motivational, organizational, and change theories
and the utilization of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to understand support
for schools implementing a student-centered learning paradigm. The purpose of this project was
to identify the resources necessary in the design of a comprehensive P-12 professional
development program that ensures implementation of student-centered teaching and learning
strategies into daily activities, while also best supporting deep teacher engagement, defined here
through the lens of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. With an embedded mixed methods design,
this study layers quantitative and qualitative data within a larger phenomenological research
design. The data includes surveys from 89 faculty members and three focus groups from an
American-International school in Latin America. This project finds notable areas to address in
teacher professional development, especially in the domains of conceptual knowledge of student-
centered learning, collective efficacy, value, and organizational influences. Based on the findings
in conjunction with a literature review, this project recommends an educational model to
systematically provide a framework for student-centered learning.

Keywords: student-centered learning, P-12 education, flow theory, Teacher Flow, professional
development

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

14
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem of Practice
When teachers are fully engaged in their teaching, students are more likely to be engaged
in their learning (Bakker, 2005). Teacher engagement and professionalism increases when
teachers participate in a cycle of critical reflection (Rodgers, 2002). Developing this self-
knowledge opens opportunities for teachers to deepen understanding of their practice and
experiment with the potentials that exist in their learning environment (Rodgers, 2006).
Unfortunately, a majority of teachers do not feel this kind of engagement and are simply not
fulfilled in their work. Studies show that 54% of teachers choose to leave the profession within
five years (Gray & Taie, 2015). Those who do stay often feel they are part of a growing “culture
of unhappiness” in schools (Bullough & Pinnegar, 2009). Only 30% of teachers report
engagement with their teaching (Hastings & Agrawal, 2015). Further, while superintendents
overwhelmingly rate engagement as “very important,” only 34% of students are actually
classified as “Future Ready,” characterized as a healthy combination of “hopeful, engaged, and
thriving” (Gallup, 2015). This lack of engagement in school by both students and teachers is
threatening students’ academic success, well-being, and their capacity to lead meaningful lives
(Seligman, 2012). Therefore, the issue of student engagement in learning must be addressed by
creating an environment where teachers can be deeply engaged.
Organizational Context and Mission
The International School of Latin America (pseudonym) is a private bilingual and
bicultural, college preparatory institution located in Latin America. The mission of the
International School of Latin America (ISLA) is to empower students to live meaningful lives
characterized by active engagement in their learning, the pursuit of personal excellence,
intellectual risk-taking, social consciousness, and contribution to both local and global
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

15
community. The school strives to challenge students to actively construct their knowledge and be
engaged in, and responsible for, their learning within the context of a student-centered learning
environment.
The school serves approximately 1,600 students from preschool through grade 12.
Approximately 80% of the students are from various regions of Latin America, while the
remaining 20% of students come from the United States, South Korea, or other countries around
the world. Of these students, 99.5% are learning English as an additional language. To instruct
these students, the school employs approximately 200 full time teaching faculty. Of these
teachers, about 40% are classified as “overseas-hires” from the United States, Canada, and New
Zealand, and the other 60% are classified as “local-hires” from Latin America (International
School of Latin America, 2016).
To prepare ISLA students for university options outside of Latin America, the school
models its academic program on curriculum, educational methodologies, and best practices of
the United States of America. The school also implements the host country’s national
curriculum. Additionally, working in conjunction with the local university teacher preparation
program, the school is recognized by the Ministry of Education as an official “laboratory school”
(International School of Latin America, 2016).
Organizational Performance Status/Need
The student population at ISLA remains consistent from kindergarten through 12th grade.
While it is the nature of the overseas-hire contracts to turn over every few years, the school has
recently faced a teacher turnover rate characterized as “unhealthy” for the organization’s growth,
development, and sustainability of programs (Desroches, 2013; International School of Latin
America, 2016). Additionally, in a recent climate survey, students, parents, teachers, and
administrators all reported problems with engagement across the school (International School of
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

16
Latin America, 2016). This lack of engagement contributes to a significant issue of professional
accountability. The teachers are expected to provide the school with professionalism and
instructional practices that support the mission, vision, and strategic goals of the school.
However, there are currently not clearly defined expectations or processes for teachers across
sections to either understand the elements of their professional expectations or engage in
systematic P-12 professional development (Director, personal communication, July 14, 2016).
As a result, teachers are often unclear of expectations, and feel disconnected to the goals of the
organization (International School of Latin America, 2016). Therefore, ISLA must take concrete
actions to build capacity and hold both the administration and teachers accountable, increase
retention, and provide strong, sustainable programs at the school. The school must implement a
policy and program to engage, develop, and retain its teaching faculty to fulfill its mission and
offer a high-quality educational experience that equips students with the tools necessary to lead
meaningful lives. Failure to do so could result in teachers not meeting school expectations, not
having an understanding of the effectiveness of their instruction, and not developing a shared
understanding and commitment to the goals of the institution. Ultimately, teachers would be at
risk of feeling isolated and disillusioned, and continuing to leave the school after only a few
years of employment. Consequently, failure to implement this professional development program
leaves students at risk for having gaps in their learning and not engaging in consistent,
appropriate, and research-based learning activities that inspire them to live meaningful,
responsible lives as global citizens. Thus, without a systematic and comprehensive on-site P-12
faculty professional development program, the school will not be able to achieve its mission.
Therefore, the organization needs a systematic method for defining, monitoring, communicating,
and strengthening the holistic professional learning experience. While different sections of the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

17
school have traditionally and currently implement section-specific professional development, no
such P-12 system exists.
Related Literature
Teachers are largely dissatisfied and disillusioned with their careers. Teachers continue to
report that they are reluctant to discuss their work with others. They have high incidences of
mental wandering in order to “escape.” They also experience emotional exhaustion, decreased
effectiveness, blaming others, and feeling powerless to change their situation (Larivee, 2012).
This teacher disengagement is in line with a global trend for what it means to be a “worker.” A
2012 report revealed that at least 40% of adults are disengaged and feel unfulfilled throughout
their careers in the global work force (Hewitt, 2012). As such, happiness and well-being have
emerged as a primary concern in education, for both teachers and the students for whom they are
modeling ways of being in the world (Seligman, 2012; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014).
Teachers should be supported in achieving a state of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013).
Teacher Flow describes the state in which teachers are fully aware and engaged in the act of
facilitating learning. In this state, teachers feel sufficiently challenged, have clear goals and a
feedback loop, are intensely focused, act spontaneously, and feel intrinsically rewarded by the
teaching experience (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014; Basom & Frase, 2004;
Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Lauman, 2011; Marshall, 2013). When teachers can reach this state,
their students are more likely to as well (Bakker, 2005).
Teachers can be supported in achieving Teacher Flow in multiple ways. It has been found
that teachers are more likely to achieve a state of flow in their work and teaching when they are
provided a well-structured support system for them as individuals, in both developing their craft
and believing their work positively impacts their students (Bakker, 2005; Marshall, 2013).
Additionally, developing collaborative, trusting, and diverse teams have been found to be an
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

18
important element in achieving flow states (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014; Basom & Frase,
2004; Beard & Hoy, 2010; Bullough & Pinnegar, 2009; Lauman, 2011). Finally,
Csikszentmihalyi (2013) and Henricks (2015) both argue that play (both purposeful games and
playful interactions) is closely linked to flow and, thus, incorporating play into teachers’
professional development and the facilitation of the learning environment can be an effective
way to deepen teacher engagement with both their craft and their students (Fernández-Oliveras
& Oliveras, 2015).
Importance of the Organizational Innovation
The problem of teacher disengagement is important to address for a variety of reasons. If
teachers do not find fulfillment and happiness in their work, they are likely to become part of the
growing numbers of those who leave the profession. For those who continue teaching, the
learning environment will suffer (Bullough & Pinnegar, 2009). If the students witness their
teachers disengage, they too tend to disengage (Bakker, 2005). Students who disengage in school
are more likely to drop out, have substance abuse issues, and disengagement extending into their
adulthood (Henry, 2012). Education has traditionally defined engagement as being akin to
participation and time spent on studies (U.S. National Survey of Student Engagement, 2014).
The focus here is instead engagement defined as the degree to which one passionately embraces
and enjoys learning as a meaningful part of their life (Boyle, Connolly, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012).
Unfortunately, this passion for learning declines as children age; regardless of geographic area
(urban, suburban, or rural), 40-60% of students become “chronically disengaged” from their
learning by the time they reach high school (Klem & Connell, 2004, p. 263). Sadly, students rank
their enthusiasm about and engagement with school just above going to the dentist (Seligman,
2012).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

19
Therefore, if students come to know this disengagement as the norm for how they interact
with the world, they will likely continue to be disengaged adults. Thus, to increase engagement
in our students and the future workforce, we must create an environment in which teachers can
be more fully engaged and where they find support in their individual and collective craft in the
most effective and fulfilling ways possible (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013). Doing so invites teachers
and students to engage passionately in their teaching and learning, and also in what it means to
lead a happy, healthy, and meaningful life (McGonigal, 2015). Addressing this problem is not
just vital to the well-being and professional success of teachers, it is essential for the future
contentment and success of students (Seligman, 2012).
Organizational Performance Goal
By fall 2017, International School of Latin America will implement a comprehensive
faculty professional development program that ensures consistent teacher implementation of
student-centered teaching and learning practices across all sections of the school. The director of
the school established this goal in conjunction with the leadership team and the Board of
Trustees following the 2016 accreditation site visit and resulting accreditation report. The
achievement of this goal will be measured externally by the results of the mid-term accreditation
audit, internally by pre- and post-survey, and by the tracking of teacher satisfaction and retention
rates. It is important for the International School of Latin America to implement this professional
development program for a variety of reasons. With the implementation of this innovation,
teachers will gain the support needed to ensure professional growth, increased job satisfaction,
increased communication, continuity of programs, increased student achievement, and
achievement of the school-wide strategic goals.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

20
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The International School of Latin America stakeholder groups are the Office of
Instruction and Professional Learning (OIPL), teacher leaders, and the teaching faculty at the
school. These three groups are all uniquely vital to the achievement of the organizational
performance goal and contribute to its success. The OIPL will provide the overall P-12 structure
of support for the teachers, be responsible for the planning and implementation of the P-12
professional development program, and work with the section administrators to track and
monitor the progress towards the goal. The teacher leaders will lead curricular and professional
learning teams within previously determined focus areas related to the school’s priorities and
goals. The contribution of the teacher leaders will be especially important as they will guide their
teams in reviewing and conducting research related to student-centered best practices within each
of their areas of focus. The teachers will engage in the P-12 professional development program
through a self-reflection and goal setting process, membership in the previously mentioned
curricular groups, utilization of the strategies learned in their classroom, documentation of their
work, collaboration with their professional learning teams to refine their practice, and reflection
on their progress. While a complete needs analysis would focus on all stakeholders, the
stakeholder group of focus for this study is the teaching faculty at the ISLA.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
Table 1
Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission

The mission of the International School of Latin America (ISLA) is to empower students to live
meaningful lives characterized by active engagement in their learning, the pursuit of personal
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

21
excellence, intellectual risk-taking, social consciousness, and contribution to both local and global
community.

Organizational Performance Goal
By September 2017, International School of Latin America will implement a professional
development program which is focused on student-centered learning and consistent across all
sections (P-12) of the school.

Stakeholder 1 Goal Stakeholder 2 Goal Stakeholder 3 Goal
Office of Instruction and
Professional Learning

By January 2017, The Office of
Instruction and Professional
Learning will conduct an
internal audit to establish a
baseline of current student-
centered practices at the school.
Curriculum Liaison
Teacher Leaders

By July 2017, 100% of the 59
Curriculum Liaison Teacher
Leaders will engage in a week-
long facilitation training
designed to equip them to
effectively lead their teams in
reflective practices to improve
student engagement and
learning.
Teachers

By September 2018, 100% of
the teaching faculty will
implement student-centered
teaching and learning practices
from the professional
development program in their
daily activities.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
All of the previously mentioned stakeholders will be vital contributors to the achievement
of the overall organizational goal of implementing consistent student-centered teaching and
learning practices across all sections of the school. However, it is especially important to
understand the needs of the teaching faculty as they attempt to implement the strategies of
student-centered teaching. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study will be all ISLA
teaching faculty.
The stakeholder goal, supported by the Director of the Office of Instruction and
Professional Learning, is that by September 2018, 100% of International School of Latin
America teaching faculty will engage in the P-12 professional development program and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

22
implement student-centered teaching and learning practices in their daily activities. The
professional development program includes activities such as professional development plans
based on school-wide goals, engagement in action research groups, utilization of the strategies
learned in their classroom, documentation of their learning and work through the process,
collaboration with their professional learning teams to refine their practice, reflection on their
progress, and presentation of best practices at a school-wide conference. This stakeholder goal
was determined initially through a strategic planning process during the 2015-2016 school year.
The process included a team reflective of all stakeholder groups. The goal was further refined in
the 2016-2017 school year by the Office of Instruction and Professional Learning during the
action plan writing phase of the strategic planning process.
Scanning interviews and the 2016 accreditation report reveal that no ISLA teaching
faculty currently implement such school-wide professional development plans in their daily
activities because, while sections implement independent professional development geared to the
needs of their own sections, no P-12 program currently exists. The gap in performance, therefore,
is 100%. If the teaching faculty does not meet this goal and engage in a comprehensive P-12
professional development program, it leaves students at risk for having gaps in their learning and
not engaging in consistent, appropriate, and research-based learning activities that inspire them
to live meaningful, responsible lives as global citizens. Thus, without engagement in a systematic
and comprehensive on-site faculty professional development program, the school will not be able
to achieve its mission.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study is to conduct a needs analysis of the resources necessary to
reach the International School of Latin America (ISLA) goal of implementing a comprehensive
P-12 professional development program that ensures implementation of student-centered
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

23
teaching and learning strategies into daily activities. Employing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis model, this analysis begins with the generation of possible needs associated with
knowledge, motivation, and organizational culture. The study will then examine those potential
needs to focus on actual or corroborated needs systematically. While a complete needs analysis
would focus on all stakeholders, the stakeholder group of focus for this study is the teaching
faculty at the ISLA.
The questions guiding this study are:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for P-12
teachers to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices from the
professional development program in their daily activities?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements necessary in the
professional environment to further support the teachers achieving the phenomenon
of flow in their implementation of the professional development program?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and the teachers’
knowledge and motivation to implement student-centered teaching and learning
practices in their daily activities?
4. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to
those needs?
Methodological Framework
As mentioned previously, this study employs the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
model, which systematically analyzes the gap between actual and preferred performance. The
model will be adapted to identify and analyze the organization’s needs. The study identifies the
assumed knowledge, motivational, and organizational needs based on personal understanding
and the related literature.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

24
Following the identification of assumed needs, this study will then seek to authenticate
those needs through an embedded mixed-methods design through surveys and focus groups. This
design layers quantitative and qualitative data within a larger phenomenological research design
(Creswell, 2014). This method will provide multiple sources of evidence to support the overall
design of the phenomenological research. This design will allow for integration of the
quantitative and qualitative methods, connections within the databases, and a merging of the data
within the larger phenomenological research (Creswell, 2014). This approach allows the study to
inform the recommended research-based solutions more holistically and more rigorously.
Following the data analysis, the study recommends research-based solutions and an
implementation and evaluation model.
Definitions
Student-centered learning: A paradigm for education characterized by learner autonomy
propelled by student interests, questions, choices, dialogue and interactions, and student self-
reflection that further drives opportunity for deep learning with a focus on meaning.
Student engagement: The degree to which students passionately embrace their studies and enjoy
learning as a meaningful part of their lives.
Teacher Flow: The state in which teachers feel sufficiently challenged, have clear goals and a
feedback loop, are intensely focused, act spontaneously, and feel intrinsically rewarded by the
teaching experience.
P-12 alignment: A general term describing the articulation of curriculum and instruction
throughout the school from grades preschool through grade 12.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One has provided a discussion of
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

25
teacher engagement, described as Teacher Flow, and introduced the reader to key concepts and
terminology related to Teacher Flow as well as the mission, goals, and stakeholders of the
institution. This chapter has also introduced the concept of gap analysis as a means to address the
school’s needs. Chapter Two reviews current literature relevant to the study. Chapter Three
outlines the needs of the stakeholders for this study and defines the methodology related to the
choice of study participants, data collection, and analysis. Chapter Four reviews, assesses, and
analyzes the data, results, and findings. Chapter Five considers the data alongside the literature,
provides possible solutions for closing the performance gap, and makes recommendations for
implementing and evaluating a related plan for the innovation.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

26
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter reviews literature related to teacher engagement in onsite professional
learning programs. The first section gives an overview of teacher satisfaction in schools and
outlines the concept of Teacher Flow. The second section reviews current trends and strategies
for teacher engagement and support including approaches to professional learning, leadership,
and teacher appraisal. The third section reviews literature related to challenges regarding teacher
engagement with professional learning. The chapter concludes with a gap analysis of the specific
knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences which the school must address together
to support the achievement of the stakeholder goal and the experience of Teacher Flow at the
school.
Nurturing Teacher Flow
A remarkable seventy percent of K-12 teachers report disengagement with their work.
Thirteen percent of those teachers say they are “actively disengaged” (Gallup, 2014, p. 27).
Teachers overwhelmingly feel isolated and powerless (Gallup, 2014) and, ultimately, 54% of
teachers end up leaving the profession within five years (Gray & Taie, 2015). Despite these
somber statistics related to teacher job satisfaction and engagement, there may yet be reasons for
optimism. Teachers continue to report a passion for making a difference in their students’ lives, a
strong desire to engage with their colleagues collaboratively, and unlike most other professions,
a belief that there is “someone at work who encourages [their] development” (Gallup, 2014, p.
28). Perhaps there is hope. Creating the conditions for teachers to be deeply engaged in their
practice may provide the solution.
Teacher Flow describes a state of deep engagement while teaching. In this state, teachers
feel appropriately challenged, set goals and receive regular useful feedback, can take risks in
their environment, and feel both intrinsically motivated and rewarded (Aubé, Brunelle, &
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

27
Rousseau, 2014; Basom & Frase, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Lauman, 2011; Marshall,
2013). This state of flow correlates to job satisfaction and retention (Csikszentmihalyi &
LeFevre, 1989). This literature review focuses on the elements that may either inhibit or lead to
this level of teacher engagement.
An Overview of Teacher Satisfaction and Flow in P-12 Schools
Teacher Stress and Cynicism
There are several factors that affect teacher satisfaction and a teacher’s ability to reach a
flow state. Two factors found to negatively impact teacher satisfaction are stress and cynicism.
This section begins with an overview of teacher stress and the often-resulting teacher cynicism.
Teachers and stress. Teaching is widely recognized as a high-stress profession that
significantly affects teachers’ personal lives. Teacher stress is defined as negative emotions that
come from teacher workload. This stress is a multidimensional phenomenon that includes
multiple types of demands from daily work. Minimized autonomy, unclear expectations, and
conflict within the workplace all contribute to teacher stress and can be barriers to student
learning (Klassen & Chiu, 2010). In a mixed-methods study of 215 K-12 teachers, Romano and
Wahlstrom (2000) found that teachers experience moderate to high levels of stress strongly
correlating to interactions with parents and colleagues as well as work demands placed on their
time outside of the regular work day. The study advanced that stress reduction efforts improved
teaching practices and reduced attrition rates (Romano & Wahlstrom, 2000). Furthermore,
support systems that specifically address teacher stress improve peer support, clarity in teacher
roles, and general job satisfaction while also reducing complaints and work pressure (Kipps-
Vaughan, 2013).
Teachers and cynicism. Another dimension affecting teacher satisfaction is the
evolution of teacher cynicism. Cynicism is known as a type of “mental distancing” and stems
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

28
from negative, disappointing, or marginalizing work experiences. Teacher cynicism directly
correlates to low teacher satisfaction and burnout rates. Among professions, teachers are
considered likely to display cynicism, or “mental distancing” from both their work and their
students (Simbula & Guglielmi, 2010). In a cross-sectional survey of 628 international educators,
Yim and Moses (2016) found that there are significant negative consequences of cynicism on
teacher satisfaction. Efforts to reduce and explicitly address cynicism about change in schools
enhances teacher job satisfaction. Schools must address work factors such as pay, advancement
opportunities, supervision, and collaborative work with colleagues, in both policies and practice,
to reduce cynicism (Yim & Moses, 2016). As changes are introduced in education, and perhaps
communicated ineffectively, teachers are more likely to distance themselves from both their
engagement with the profession and their students. Schools must address these unique levels of
disengagement to create an environment where students will thrive. The next section outlines the
elements of a school environment that contribute to greater teacher job satisfaction.
Teacher Well-being and Satisfaction
School environments that value teacher well-being are found to have greater teacher job
satisfaction as well as improved student learning (Seligman, 2012; Sisask, Värnik, Värnik, Apter,
Balazs, Balint & Feldman, 2014; Yin, Huang & Wang, 2016). In a study of 2,485 teachers from
158 randomly selected schools across 11 countries, Sisask et al. (2014) found that teachers are
better equipped to address the needs of their students when they feel their well-being is valued.
The study also established that schools that value teacher well-being create the conditions for
improved student well-being. Additionally, the way teachers perceive themselves impacts
student behaviors. Teachers who are satisfied with their work tend to have students who also
display satisfaction with their learning (Houser & Waldbuesser, 2016).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

29
Teacher ownership of well-being. To be most effective in the classroom, teachers must
take ownership of their own well-being, pay particular attention to it, and be equipped to regulate
their emotional states. Teachers must also be made aware of the emotional demands of the
teaching profession as well as the impact of their well-being on their effectiveness as a teacher
(Yin, Huang & Wang, 2016). Therefore, addressing teacher well-being must become a priority
for schools and policy makers (Yin, Huang & Wang, 2016). Valuing teacher well-being supports
the entire system: the students, the teachers, and the overall health of the school.
Flourishing. Well-being, also known as “flourishing,” is linked to a teacher’s multi-
dimensional experience at work, relating to the overall organizational construct and culture,
workload, and student needs. Seligman (2012) defines well-being as a construct where positive
emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning, and achievement work together. Flourishing is a
measure of well-being that also includes self-determination, self-esteem, vitality, and resilience.
In a practice-oriented mixed-methods approach measuring teacher well-being among 603
teachers across four districts, Collie, Shapka, Perry, and Martin (2015) measured the three
specific factors of well-being that contribute to a teacher’s ability to “flourish” in the school
environment: workload well-being; organizational well-being; and student-interaction well-
being. The study found that a focus on the elements of the environment where teachers are
thriving supports a teacher’s overall well-being and ability to “flourish” as an educator. Seligman
(2012) and Collie, Shapka, Perry, and Martin (2015) both assert that teachers are in the unique
position of supporting students as a model for well-being to lead a meaningful life. Schools must,
therefore, provide teachers an environment where they can flourish, model well-being, and
systematically improve their satisfaction. As we will discuss next, there are many ways to do so.
The next section reviews literature related to teacher self-efficacy, supporting teacher passions,
and Collective Teacher Pedagogical Culture.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

30
Improving Teacher Satisfaction
Teacher self-efficacy. Teacher job satisfaction and self-efficacy are explicitly linked.
There is a significant relationship between high teacher self-efficacy and positive feelings about
teaching (Zee & Koomen, 2016). In a quantitative survey of 1,430 K-12 teachers, Klassen and
Chiu (2010) investigated self-efficacy in regards to classroom management, instruction, and
student engagement and their relationship to years of experience, stress, and job satisfaction. In
this multi-dimensional look at teacher self-efficacy, the researchers found that teachers who had
greater classroom stress had less self-efficacy. The study also found that teachers will be more
likely to develop self-efficacy and have increased confidence with personalized and
differentiated professional development. Further, teachers with high self-efficacy stay motivated
on the job (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Therefore, supporting teachers in developing self-efficacy is
vital. The next sections discuss strategies for supporting that efficacy.
Teacher passion. Teaching can be seen as a form of human flourishing, one which many
teachers enter into passionately. When teachers approach their work with passion, they are found
to have a higher rate of job satisfaction. For many teachers, the act of teaching itself is classified
as a “passionate activity” (Moé, 2016) and often considered an investment in the “self”
(Bullough & Pinnegar, 2009). Yet, while teachers usually start with “passion,” that passion often
dwindles and many become disillusioned (Garmston & Wellman, 2016). Exploring a Deweyan
perspective on education as an aesthetic experience (recognizing that the emotional, the
cognitive, and action are all connected), Hobbs (2012) conducted a qualitative data generation
study of 52 math and science classrooms over the course of two years. Passion was exhibited by
teachers in three different ways: passion for subject matter; passion for student engagement; and
passion for the act of teaching. These passions were affected by job satisfaction, positive affect,
and self-efficacy. Teachers also reported that passion for their practice can be a challenge to
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

31
nurture in relation to workload (Hobbs, 2012). A teacher’s ability to do so relates to perceived
job support (Moé, 2016). A focus on systematically developing and nurturing teacher passions
could not only prevent teacher stress and adverse effects but also create an environment where
teachers are subsequently fueled in a way that sets the conditions for students to thrive. One
opportunity for fueling teacher passions is through the conscious development of Collective
Teacher Pedagogical Culture.
Collective teacher pedagogical culture. Schools which systematically focus on
developing teacher social capital through a Collective Teacher Pedagogical Culture have higher
levels of teacher job satisfaction and passionate engagement with their teaching craft (Moller,
Stearns, Mickelson, Bottia, & Banerjee, 2014; Stearns, Banerjee, Moler, & Mickelson, 2015).
Collective Teacher Pedagogical Culture is characterized by active collaboration among teachers
within a robust professional community. Factors vital to such culture are that teachers feel
respected as professionals, feel a sense of connection to the school, and are continually engaged
in planning and learning together. Within this strong community, leaders clearly communicate
shared vision and mission (Stearns, Banerjee, Moller, & Mickelson, 2015). In one longitudinal
study with a nationally representative sample of kindergarten teachers, Moller et al. (2014)
highlighted the important connection between human agency and the structures in which they
interact. The study found that focusing on student engagement alone did not have impact unless
the organizational structure for collective teacher engagement was also addressed. Furthermore,
the study found that when teachers perceive that professional community and teacher
collaboration exist and are valued, there is increased engagement, satisfaction, and teacher social
capital. Teacher social capital is a collective experience where teachers work together to
facilitate work towards a common goal within a single structure. Modipane and Themane (2014)
conducted a descriptive study using multiple qualitative methods to better understand the impact
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

32
of teacher social capital on curriculum implementation in 20 different schools employing the
Child-Friendly School Framework developed by UNICEF. Teacher social capital was a
significant predictor of increases in student achievement gains. Additionally, teacher social
capital was found to be vital in the successful implementation of the curriculum (Modipane, &
Themane, 2014). Traditionally, schools have operated in “silos” with teachers feeling separated
from each other. Teachers who instead work together as a collective unit and feel they are part of
a Collective Teacher Pedagogical Culture with robust teacher social capital are more satisfied
and successful in their work.
Flow Concepts in Schools
Literature regarding effective teacher development, engagement, and renewal embody the
concepts of the theory of flow. The elements of a flow experience are that there are clear goals,
immediate and relevant feedback, and a balance between skill and appropriate level of challenge.
Teachers can and should be nurtured in achieving flow states. In fact, they are actually more
likely to achieve flow states in their work setting, rather than outside of work (Csikszentmihalyi,
2013). Bassi and Fave (2012) conducted a multi-phase experience sampling and survey study of
14 and 184 teachers respectively investigating work-related motivation and behavior regulation.
The findings validated that flow experiences correlated to both independent and controlled
regulation (Bassi & Fave, 2012). Teachers have opportunities to achieve these flow experiences
by balancing skill and challenge in their daily experiences, both on their own and within the
school structure. Therefore, school leaders play a critical role in nurturing flow experiences that
contribute to this level of teacher engagement (Cartwright, 2006). Despite the way the structures
of schools have often been set up and carried out, schools, as places of learning, are natural
settings for encouraging flow. As we will see next, the impact of Teacher Flow on student
engagement is worth considering.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

33
Impact of teacher flow on student engagement. There are significant connections
between the elements of Teacher Flow and student engagement and achievement. When there is
a focus on adequate resources, autonomy, feedback, coaching, and social support, Teacher Flow
is found to increase, which increases achievement of flow states in students (Bakker, 2005).
Student engagement, well-being, and performance are all profoundly interwoven with teacher
engagement, satisfaction, and ability to achieve a state of flow (Bassi & Fave, 2012). When the
teacher is deeply engaged, the student will more likely be too. Looking a little deeper into the
experience, we see that there is also discussion of how flow can be specific to teaching and
learning.
Academic optimism. Academic optimism is defined as self-efficacy, trust, and academic
hopefulness specific to teaching and learning. There is a reciprocal relationship between flow
and academic optimism. With a typical sample of 260 elementary teachers, Beard and Hoy
(2010) set out to examine flow theory specific to teaching and the school environment. The
findings revealed that when academic optimism is present in schools, there is an increase in the
likelihood of flow to occur (Beard & Hoy, 2010). When teachers receive support in achieving a
state of flow, there is increased achievement, engagement, and overall satisfaction in the work
and learning environment. As we will see next, the team experience further reinforces this
reciprocity of academic optimism and flow.
Collective flow. The flow experience is not just an individual teacher experience. It is
also related to a collective experience. One study examined the flow commitment and
achievement of 85 work teams (394 total participants). Through a survey questionnaire upon
completion of a team task, the researchers found positive correlation with flow achievement and
team performance. This study highlighted that the work conditions that lead to flow states,
including well-defined goals/rules, continuous feedback, information exchange, and stimulating
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

34
challenges were also found to have a “contagion effect” (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014).
Flow breeds flow. Since collaboration is an increasingly important element of the teacher
experience, collective flow has been identified as an area where research should continue
(Rodríguez-Sánchez, Salanova, Cifre, & Schaufeli, 2011). While the body of literature is
relatively limited in this area, it appears that when there is support for teachers to achieve a state
of collective flow, there are even further increases in achievement, engagement, and overall
satisfaction in the work and learning environment.
Flow and development of expertise. As teachers grow in their craft, school must also
place content expertise as an area of focus. There is a relationship between organizational
culture, internal factors, and Teacher Flow experiences. These elements affect teacher
motivation. In a mixed-methods study of 249 nationally recognized K-12 teachers, Mayeaux
(2013) explored the impact of school culture, internal work factors, and flow and their inherent
relationship to the development of expertise. The study found that when teachers are encouraged
to develop their content expertise in a way that acknowledges their personal experience, there is
increased flow. Therefore, schools must make effort to support the development of expertise.
There must be a balance in nurturing the overall teacher satisfaction experience with the
encouragement and development of content expertise. Teachers can achieve a state of flow with
both.
Current Trends and Strategies for Teacher Engagement in Professional Development
Trends in Approaches to Professional Learning
In the wake of the understanding that traditional models of teacher evaluation have been
shown to be ineffective in creating a solid and engaged teaching force, many schools and
districts are beginning to reform teacher appraisal, evaluation, and professional growth systems
(Darling-Hammond, Amrein-Beardsley, Haertel, & Rothstein, 2012; Marzano, 2012). Evaluation
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

35
and growth systems are often in opposition to each other and have been found to undermine trust
within school cultures (Buckalew, 2013). Marzano (2012) asserts that combined teacher
evaluation and growth programs have not led to meaningful professional growth and must be
separated to be effective. Therefore, professional development programs must serve the growth
of teachers and begin to look at teacher development through a new lens. Towards that, many
trends are emerging to help teachers stay engaged, develop efficacy, and improve practice. This
section discusses the structures of professional learning communities, strengths-based
development, and leadership.
Professional learning communities. The structure of professional learning communities
acknowledges that human beings are interrelated and through multiple perspectives,
consciousness about practice can grow. The structure of a professional learning community
offers an opportunity to learn from successes collectively (Schechter, 2010). Professional
learning communities place on-going professional learning in the hands of the teachers as a
valued, valuable, and capable team of professionals who come together to focus on student
learning. Professional learning teams empower teachers to take ownership of their successes and
challenges and develop as professionals together (Curry, 2008). Two elements emerge as
necessary for the development of these communities: trust and relationships.
Trust. Trust has emerged as an important topic in the literature regarding building teams.
It has been found that trust can thrive in a school environment through specific actions by team
members (Garmston & Wellman, 2016). Trust is developed when team members are reliable,
open, and kind. Perceived competence and follow through are also important aspects of
developing trust (Hallam, Smith, Hite, Hite, & Wilcox, 2015). As groups are developing,
attention must be given to both assessing and providing opportunity for developing trust
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

36
(Garmston & Wellman, 2016). Teachers must develop trust in their colleagues to be most
effective in their collaborative communities and their teaching.
Relationships. Relationships are a vital component of developing trust in learning
communities. Schools are organizations that are founded on relationships (parent-teacher,
student-teacher, teacher-principal, etc.). Relationships within the structure have an impact on the
health of the institution. As teachers are beginning to form professional learning communities,
there should be a particular focus on developing relationships that support ongoing learning and
active engagement with their craft (Modipane & Themane, 2014).
Strengths-based approaches to professional learning. Studies show a strengths-based
approach to professional learning supports teachers towards meaningful and sustained growth. A
strengths-based approach to professional learning acknowledges that teachers need basic human
needs met: the need for autonomy; acknowledgment and expression of competency; and
connection. This approach focuses on “core reflection,” the process of developing awareness of
flow states when teaching (Zwart, Korthagen & Attema-Noordewier, 2015). Determining the
areas where a teacher is thriving improves the teacher work experience (Collie, Shapka, Perry, &
Martin, 2015). Schecter (2010) conducted one particularly notable qualitative case study. This
study looked closely at “learning from success” processes with professional learning
communities in middle and high schools. The comprehensive data included transcripts of
sessions, document analysis, observation of team development processes, and evaluations.
Schools that create structures of professional learning communities that leverage successes were
found to have an increase in collaborative teacher engagement. This model also uses teacher
successes as a springboard for professional learning and was found to promote “active listening”
and deepen understanding across the school (Schechter, 2010). Schools often operate from a
deficit model and focus on negative aspects, weaknesses, or challenges. Instead, schools must
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

37
function from a different paradigm and focus on teaching and learning successes to be most
effective.
Nature of Leadership in Schools
Leadership support. The nature of leadership support is a vital aspect of the teacher’s
ability to deepen engagement, effectively work with students, and increase job satisfaction.
Leadership in schools not only contributes to the teachers’ ability to support students in
developing a meaningful life (Seligman, 2012) but also significantly impacts the organizational
structures that affect student engagement (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Leaders can specifically
support teachers in the flow experience in many ways, including minimizing distractions (such as
bells and intercoms), providing time for planning, providing training on the design of high
quality curricula and instruction, assuring that the conditions of the teachers’ work environment
are conducive to continual development and accomplishments, and providing teachers with time
to discuss, analyze, and reflect on their classroom successes and failures (Basom & Frase, 2004).
All this in mind, leadership extends beyond district and building administration. We now turn
our attention to the teacher as leader.
Teacher leaders and “teacherpreneurs.” Successful schools focus on developing
leadership capacity that promotes coaching and community building (Hanover, 2012). Berry,
Byrd, and Wieder (2013) assert that developing the teacher as a leader leads to achievement
gains for students and deepens the teacher’s engagement. Teacher leadership has followed three
distinct waves of development: teachers who serve as department chairs or heads; teachers who
take on an instructional lead or coaching role; and teachers who lead professional learning
communities. A fourth wave of leadership has recently developed in which teachers are creators
and producers of knowledge, acting as entrepreneurs, and receive recognition or rewards for
doing so. Entrepreneurial behaviors encompass the connection of ideas, resources, and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

38
innovation. Educational entrepreneurship involves the ideological desire to make a difference in
students’ lives and solve social problems through the creative management of scarce resources
and implementing innovations in teaching. In an exploratory study of 358 K-12 teachers, Neto
(2017) investigated the relationship between teacher entrepreneurship and job satisfaction.
Behaviors of teacher entrepreneurship and job satisfaction were rated on two separate previously
developed scales. The study found that teachers who display entrepreneurial behaviors have
significantly greater job satisfaction rates than their non-“teacherpreneur” counterparts.
Traditional teacher leadership roles could thus be classified as archaic and do not adequately
provide for teacher empowerment that makes a significant impact on student learning (Berry,
Byrd, & Wieder, 2013). School leaders and the on-going development of leadership capacity are
essential to the level of engagement that teachers have with their professional development and
their engagement with the entire school community. Schools must move away from outdated
structures and empower teachers to take on a new brand of leadership which models total
engagement with the world.
Challenges in Teacher Engagement Leading to Flow with Professional Learning
Time and Professional Development
Time is a significant challenge in professional learning. Regardless of place on the
continuum (novice to expert), teachers feel the lack of time is an obstacle to their effectiveness
(Tochon & Munby, 1993). Teachers often do not have autonomous time in their work schedules.
In one evaluation study of a large-scale teacher professional development program for K-12
teachers, Culp, Keane, Meade, & Nudell (2004) found that teachers reported an overwhelming
desire and need for exploration time in their professional learning opportunities. This emphasis
on creating time for exploration promoted transfer of skills. Teachers often do not have this kind
of autonomous time in their work schedules. Yet, time to experiment with materials and ideas are
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

39
vital to a teacher’s growth (Nudell, 2005). Time is thus recognized as necessary to professional
learning as it is to young children. Space and time for teachers to explore support a teacher in
being astonished by new learnings, making connections, and seeing new possibilities for the
teaching and learning environment (Rodgers, 2002). It is then necessary to recognize that any
innovation requires time for retooling structures. This retooling of education must happen as an
ongoing effort. Understanding existing use of and assumptions held about time are important
steps for schools looking to make innovative changes (Killion, 2013). Time is, therefore, both a
challenge and an opportunity for teachers in their professional development. Time can be
considered a teacher’s most valuable resource and should, therefore, be planned for, managed,
and appreciated.
“Gameful” Professional Learning: Risk-Taking and Spontaneity
An important, yet often overlooked or omitted, aspect of effective professional learning that
nurtures flow is the opportunity for teachers to engage in tasks that encourage risk-taking and
spontaneity. Encouraging “gameful” experiences in adult tasks that need to be completed and
new learning has physical, emotional, cognitive, and social benefits. Gameful approaches to
adult learning, also known as “self-expansion,” promotes engagement, motivation, improved
attention and spatial intelligence, better decision making, increased creativity and innovation,
experience of more positive emotions, stronger cooperative mindsets, and improved
communication and collaboration (McGonigal, 2015). One particular case study illustrates
gameful pedagogy as a valid learning pathway for engagement in adult collaboration
(Feigenbaum & Feigenbaum, 2013). Across disciplines, there are signs that point to the clear
benefits that a “gameful” approach to learning have on well-being, synthesized understanding
and retention of material, innovative outcomes, and satisfaction. Professional development in
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

40
schools have traditionally taken a more serious approach and have resulted in an unsatisfied and
dwindling teaching force. Perhaps it is time to look towards a new model.
Elements of play and professional development. Incorporating elements of play into
professional development (both purposeful games and playful interactions) has been found to be
an effective way to deepen teacher engagement with both teaching craft and students.
Playfulness and playful thinking allow for flexibility, purposeful challenges, meaning making,
and expression. Being playful is what defines the human experience. Play is autotelic, an activity
that has clear goals and purposes, and allows for a way to engage with different contexts as an
avenue for creativity while also building connections and community (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013;
Sicart, 2014). One mixed-methods study of 35 pre-service teachers collected pre- and post-
content knowledge and perceptions about professional development in math and science that
incorporated play as a professional learning strategy. The study found that there was a positive
relationship between play, science, mathematics, and education. The researchers asserted that
play is just as useful for adults and their professional learning as it is for children and their
learning (Fernández-Oliveras, & Oliveras, 2015). Play is also closely linked to flow.
Csikszentmihalyi (2013) notes that playful interactions are necessary for deep engagement. Any
environment, including but perhaps especially schools, should consider the experience of the
people engaging in it. Play, for children, is valued as a space in which the child can acquire new
skills, take risks, make connections, and systematically build thinking. Those benefits do not end
after childhood. Incorporating elements of play and fun into the teacher professional
development environment has been found to effectively engage teachers, stimulate thinking
about complex ideas, and increase communication and capacity.
Creating challenging tasks. Finally, an essential aspect of a flow experience is the
presence of challenge that adequately balances skills. With a focus on balancing of skill and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

41
challenge, there is the opportunity for adults to achieve flow through absorption, motivation, and
enjoyment (Khan & Pearce, 2015). Work experiences should include stimulating challenges to
best achieve flow. The more communication with team members as part of those stimulating
challenges, the more often and likely flow is to occur (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014).
Creative and innovative learning is not likely to arise when attempts at new learning are through
discrete approaches. Learning that is constructivist, dynamic, and collaborative is shown to yield
the most creative learning (Sawyer, 2015). Growth occurs when challenging tasks meet skill
level. Further, when teams undertake these challenges, flow is more possible.
The first half of this chapter has reviewed literature related to teacher engagement in
professional learning programs, teacher satisfaction, and the elements of a school environment
that may contribute to a state of Teacher Flow. The review has also considered the general
literature addressing current trends and strategies for teacher engagement and support. Next, this
chapter looks at literature specific to the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
needs specific to the International School of Latin America.
The Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model is the conceptual framework guiding this
study. The framework systematically identifies and then examines the difference between actual
and preferred performance. The model acknowledges that knowledge (K) and motivation (M) are
both essential to goal achievement. Furthermore, the model emphasizes that addressing
knowledge and motivation alone is not enough to achieve and sustain goals. Understanding the
interplay of knowledge and motivation within the organizational culture (O) is critical to
accomplish goals and realize change (Clark & Estes, 2008).
For this innovation study, the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model will be adapted to
identify and analyze the International School of Latin America’s needs concerning the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

42
implementation of P-12 professional development. The following section identifies and reviews
literature related to the particular knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences that
must be leveraged together for ISLA teachers to successfully implement the elements of the P-12
professional development program into their daily activities. This understanding of teacher
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences as a functioning system is an important
aspect of the larger investigation in considering ways to best support the experience of Teacher
Flow, which is essential for optimal teacher engagement (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014;
Bakker, 2005; Klem & Connell, 2004; Marshall, 2013) and corollary optimal student
performance (Klem & Connell, 2004).
Knowledge and Skills
Organizations must identify necessary knowledge and skills to increase performance,
solve problems, and adapt to change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Addressing knowledge gaps is
essential to facilitate growth in an organization. This section reviews literature focused on the
knowledge-related influences relevant to the successful achievement of the ISLA teaching
faculty goal.
Knowledge influences. Knowledge refers to mental structures and is categorized into
four distinct areas: declarative factual; declarative conceptual; procedural; or metacognitive
knowledge (Krathwol, 2002). Factual and conceptual knowledge are declarative and refer to
what is being learned, either discrete, isolated content (factual) or more complex, schematic
content (conceptual). The main differences between factual and conceptual knowledge are the
ways in which the information is interpreted. Conceptual knowledge refers to deeper and more
complex understanding of the knowledge (Krathwol, 2002). Procedural knowledge refers to how
to do something or the steps one must take in a process. Finally, metacognitive knowledge refers
to self-awareness, knowledge about one’s own thinking processes, the approaches to one’s own
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

43
thinking, and thinking about how one might carry out a task. All of these knowledge types are
required for optimal learning (Seli, n.d). With this understanding of the distinctions within
knowledge, we turn the focus to understanding the specific knowledge influences that affect
ISLA teachers in their goal achievement.
For ISLA teachers to optimally achieve their goal and implement student-centered
teaching and learning practices in their daily activities, issues related to what the specific
knowledge is and how it is processed must first be identified and then addressed. The following
sections will examine the literature relevant to the teachers’ achievement of this professional
learning goal. The two specific types of knowledge that are particularly relevant and will be
addressed here are conceptual knowledge regarding student-centered learning and metacognitive
knowledge regarding teacher reflection.
Student-centered learning. Identifying knowledge and skills is an important aspect to
facilitate change in an organization (Clark & Estes, 2008). As ISLA focuses on professional
development for student-centered learning, teachers need to know and understand several
important factors in regards to conceptual knowledge. First, it is important that teachers are
aware of the exact expectations for what it means to be a student-centered learning professional
at ISLA. Additionally, teachers must know the ways in which student-centered learning and
teacher-centered learning differ. Teachers also need to know the strategies associated with
student-centered learning.
Teachers must have clear awareness about the expectations associated with student-
centered learning at ISLA (Estes, 2004). According to Information Processing Theory, the ways
in which knowledge is organized affects how individuals learn and apply that learning further
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). This conceptual knowledge must be clear and coherent and allow
teachers the ability to organize the information about the student-centered learning expectations
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

44
in a way that supports their learning and transfer of the expectations into their practice. A
cognitive schema and clear domains about student-centered learning must therefore be developed
regarding the conceptual understanding of student-centered learning so that the teachers can best
transfer their learning into their daily activities (Van Gerven, Paas, Van Merrienboer, & Schmidt,
2002).
Teachers must also be able to differentiate between the elements of a teacher-centered
and student-centered learning environment. Estes (2004) asserts that there are “inconsistencies
between espoused values and values in practice” (p.143) in regards to the understanding of a true
student-centered learning environment. Teachers must be able to have working knowledge of
concepts in facilitation and ludic engagement (Estes, 2004; Van Leeuwen & Westwood, 2008).
Additionally, when discussing the difference between student- and teacher-centered learning,
particular knowledge surrounding power dynamics in a traditional classroom should also be
understood (Estes, 2004). Freire (1993) suggests that a teacher-centered learning environment
resembles oppression in society and suggests that the classroom experience instead be more
student-centered. This critical pedagogy calls for the student to be a “being for themselves”
(Freire, 1993, p. 55). Behavioral Learning Theory suggests that identifying the specific
objectives and environmental influences that affect the knowledge will impact the learning of
that knowledge (Daly, 2009; Tuckman, 2009). Therefore, ISLA teachers must be able to
specifically differentiate within their environment where student-centered learning is and is not
supported.
Finally, it is important for teachers to have knowledge of the language and strategies of
true student-centered learning (Estes, 2004). Zhao (2015) asserts that knowledge is achieved, not
taught, and that a deep understanding of how students make meaning is vital to optimal learning.
This concept builds on the knowledge of differentiation between student- and teacher-centered
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

45
learning mentioned previously. Low schematic levels of the elements of a student-centered
learning environment combined with higher levels of understanding and development of
implementation strategies for student-centered learning slowly builds the body of knowledge
over time through segmentation, which leads to more skillful implementation and increased
expertise (Deans for Impact, 2015; Kirshner, Kirshner, & Paas, 2006).
Metacognitive teacher reflection. Another important knowledge influence for teachers to
achieve the goal and implement learning from the professional development program into their
daily activities is metacognitive knowledge regarding teacher reflection. This metacognitive
knowledge refers to both the teachers’ knowledge about their thinking and their process and
regulation of their thinking as they implement the professional development into their daily work
(Seli, n.d.). Teachers need to be able to metacognitively reflect on whether their teaching is
student-centered or teacher-centered, what they do and do not know about student-centered
learning, how that knowledge and awareness affects their work, and the ways in which they can
grow further as a professional. According to Information Processing Theory, creating the
opportunity for teachers to engage in metacognitive reflection allows teachers to make
meaningful connections (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006) and facilitates transfer and deeper
learning (Baker, 2006; Mayer, 2011; Seli, n.d.). There are important individual and collective
considerations for teachers utilizing metacognitive knowledge as part of their professional
learning.
Metacognition has an impact on both the teacher and the learning environment (Mayer,
2011). Freire (1993) challenged teachers to “mov[e] from object to subject” and to understand
strategies for critical “conscientization,” or critical consciousness, through praxis, the process of
reflection and action to improve the learning environment. Rodgers (2002) asserted that the
quality of teacher reflection leads to personal depth and understanding, and with quality
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

46
reflection, professionalism grows. Rodgers (2006) further suggests that knowing one’s self is an
effective means to engage students and accelerates their learning. This self-knowledge leads to
implications that teachers would be well positioned to experiment with what potentials exist in
their learning environment. Additionally, reflecting on behaviors that lead to flow will itself
make the attainment of the state more possible for teachers (Basom & Frase, 2004). When
teachers can achieve this level of engagement with their work, their students are more likely to as
well (Bakker, 2005; Basom & Fraise, 2004).
In addition to metacognition being valuable for individual teachers, it is also shown to be
especially important for professional teams of teachers. Rodgers (2002) suggests that
communities that employ reflective practices are those best equipped to enhance student
learning. Teacher Flow, which directly impacts student learning (Bakker, 2005), is more
probable when the following conditions are met: the creation of a trusting environment; faculty
cohesiveness; and increased communication (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014; Beard & Hoy,
2010). One study suggested that collective and shared metacognition about practice was the most
effective means to enhance learning and growth for teachers (Lauman, 2011).
Table 2 below provides a summary of the knowledge influences, types, and related
assessments necessary for the teachers at International School of Latin America to achieve the
goal of implementing student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

47

Table 2
Knowledge Influences

Organizational Mission
The mission of the International School of Latin America (ISLA) is to empower students to
live meaningful lives characterized by active engagement in their learning, the pursuit of
personal excellence, intellectual risk-taking, social consciousness, and contribution to both
local and global community.

Organizational Global Goal

By September 2017, International School of Latin America will implement a professional
development program which is focused on student-centered learning and consistent across all
sections of the school.

Stakeholder Goal

By September 2018, 100% of the teaching faculty will implement student-centered teaching
and learning practices in their daily activities.

Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Knowledge Influence
Assessment

Teachers need to know the
expectations for what it means to
be a professional at ISLA.

Declarative (factual)

Interviews about ISLA
expectations.

Teachers must clearly distinguish
between student-centered learning
and teacher-centered learning.

Declarative
(conceptual and
procedural)

Interviews asking teachers to
describe the differences between
student-centered and teacher-
centered learning.

Teachers need to know the
strategies associated with student-
centered learning, including
student-centered dialogue,
facilitation techniques, and student
reflection.

Declarative
(conceptual)

Teachers will be asked to
provide examples of student-
centered learning strategies they
have observed or practiced
themselves at the school.

Teachers need to be able to reflect
on whether their teaching is
student-centered or teacher-
centered learning.

Metacognitive

Teachers asked to reflect on their
process and where they might
need support in moving towards
student-centered learning.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

48
Motivation
Motivation is characterized by two central aspects: a learner taking initiative and
maintaining consistent behavior towards a desired goal (Mayer, 2011). Motivation is inseparable
from knowledge, and the two must be considered together (Clark, n.d.). With this in mind, it is
essential to give greater attention to understanding motivation.
Three factors define motivation: active choice; persistence; and mental effort (Clark &
Estes, 2008). Active choice is making a choice to pursue a goal, and actively starting the work
(on time) towards that goal. Persistence is working consistently through the process despite
barriers that may arise. Mental effort is the investment of determination in new learning to solve
problems in novel ways (Clark & Estes, 2008). When these factors of motivation combine with
knowledge, skills, and processes, there is increased performance (Clark & Estes, 2008).
This section will review literature that focuses on motivation influences related to ISLA
teaching faculty achieving the goal to implement learning from the student-centered learning
professional development program in their daily activities. Specifically, it will discuss Self-
efficacy Theory and Expectancy Value Theory as they relate to the teachers being able to
achieve their goal.
Self-efficacy theory. Self-efficacy is situational and focuses on capabilities. It is related
to the personal beliefs or judgments individuals or organizations hold about their effectiveness
and ability to achieve or perform at a specific level (Hirabayashi, n.d). Self-efficacy Theory
states that motivation is enhanced when there is increased self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006).
Individuals and groups with high self-efficacy will self-select more difficult tasks, exert more
effort, continue to persist, employ more complex strategies, and approach tasks with a greater
sense of confidence (Hirabayashi, n.d).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

49
Individual self-efficacy. An important aspect of motivation for the teachers to achieve
their goal to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices is that first and foremost
the teachers need to believe they are capable of creating a student-centered learning environment.
Basom and Frase (2004) found that actual teacher self-efficacy, as well as their perception of the
efficacy of their colleagues, were important variables in creating flow experiences and deep
engagement in the classroom. Further, one study found that the more self-efficacy teachers had,
the more likely or prepared they are to be able to implement an innovation into their
environment, and the more success they would experience (Evers, 2002).
Collective self-efficacy. Another important aspect of teacher efficacy is collective
efficacy. Collective self-efficacy is the belief and confidence in the group to achieve a certain
outcome (Hirabayashi, n.d). Bandura (2000) asserts that if there is perceived collective efficacy,
there is an impact on performance, commitment to the mission, and the ability to deal with
challenges. Teacher professional development requires ongoing collaborative work among
teams. As discussed earlier in the literature review, when teachers perceive they have “collective
pedagogical teacher culture,” engagement is higher (Moller, Stearns, Mickelson, & Banerjee,
2014). Therefore, collective efficacy is a significant aspect of motivation for teachers to take and
sustain initiative.
Expectancy value theory. Expectancy Value Theory is based on the idea that motivation
can be influenced by the individual or organization’s beliefs or expectations for success as well
as their values related to the task (Hirabayashi, n.d). Eccles (2006) asserts that expectancies and
values are strong indicators for performance and success in meeting goals. There are two main
value factors that influence the ISLA teachers’ motivation for achieving their goal: utility value
and intrinsic value.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

50
Teacher utility value. Utility value, the perceived usefulness of a task, influences mental
effort towards achieving a goal (Eccles, 2006). It is important for utility value that teachers
understand and believe that the energy they put into student-centered learning environments is
worthwhile for the students (Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik, Guzdial, & Palincsar, 1991).
Providing foundation and discussion about the value of a student-centered learning environment
will support teachers in developing positive utility value (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).
Teacher intrinsic value. Intrinsic value pertains to the actual or perceived enjoyment one
experiences while completing a task (Eccles, 2006). Teachers need to feel engaged and find joy
in the process of working towards the personal goals they have set for themselves during the
professional development process. Belle (2009) identified the most dominant teacher
motivational factors as speaking to intrinsic motivation. Numerous studies also argue that
approaches that are enjoyable and provide game-like experiences lead to deeper and more
passionate embracing of the task (Boyle, Connolly, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012; Feigenbaum &
Feigenbaum, 2013; Henricks, 2015; McGonigal, 2011; Whitton & Moseley, 2014). Additionally,
Rodgers (2002) speaks to the importance of intrinsic “wholeheartedness” and “total engagement”
for the teacher to be successful.
Table 3 below illustrates a summary of motivational influences and related assessments
necessary for the teachers at International School of Latin America to achieve the goal of
implementing student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

51
Table 3
Motivation Influences

Organizational Mission
The mission of the International School of Latin America (ISLA) is to empower students to live
meaningful lives characterized by active engagement in their learning, the pursuit of personal
excellence, intellectual risk-taking, social consciousness, and contribution to both local and global
community.

Organizational Global Goal
By September 2017, International School of Latin America will implement a student-centered
learning professional development program which is consistent across all sections of the school.

Stakeholder Goal
By September 2018, 100% of the teaching faculty will implement student-centered teaching and
learning practices in their daily activities.

Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Value (Utility) – Teachers need to find the
usefulness of understanding and prioritizing the
emphasis of student-centered learning over
teacher-centered learning.

Survey items that ask teachers to priority
rank learning environments.

Value (Intrinsic)– Teachers need to feel engaged
and find joy in the process of working towards the
personal goals they have set for themselves
during the goal setting process.

Interview with teachers to determine their
engagement and personal
happiness/fulfillment around their work.
Survey item asking teachers to rate their
personal engagement with their work.

Individual Self-Efficacy – Teachers need to
believe they are capable of creating a student-
centered learning environment.

Survey item asking teachers to rate their
individual confidence in being able to
successfully implement student-centered
practices and meeting student-centered goals.

Collective Self-Efficacy – Teachers need to
believe their teams are capable of creating a
student-centered learning environment together.

Survey item asking teachers to rate their
confidence in their team being able to
successfully implement student-centered
practices and collectively meet student-
centered goals.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

52
Organization
For a change effort to be successful, solutions must consider and adapt to the
organizational culture (Clark and Estes, 2008). Ultimately, for ISLA teachers to achieve their
goal and implement student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities, issues related to organizational culture must be
addressed alongside the previously outlined knowledge and motivation influences. Beginning
with general theory about organizational culture, this section reviews literature that focuses on
organizational cultural models and settings specifically affecting the ISLA teaching faculty in
achieving their goal.
General organization theory. Organizational culture is an abstract concept that shapes
and frames the overall thinking within the organization (Schein, 2004). There is power in the
awareness of these cultural forces. In that knowledge, understanding builds. Therefore, the
culture affects the change process and, ultimately, the ability to sustain the desired change
(Kezar, 2001).
Organizational culture can be considered through three distinct lenses: artifacts, espoused
values and beliefs, and basic underlying assumptions (Schein, 2004). Artifacts refer to visible
behaviors, structures, or processes that include language, products or programs, physical
environment, or rituals of the institution. Artifacts can also relate to organizational climate as a
manifestation of the culture. Espoused values and beliefs are the articulated shared belief systems
that provide meaning for the members of the group. Finally, underlying assumptions refer to the
more deeply held values and beliefs that guide organizations, often unconsciously, and will
determine behaviors and feelings (Schein, 2004). These basic underlying assumptions are the
most challenging aspect of culture to address in the change process, especially in organizations
that have a perceived “strong” culture (Schein, 2004).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

53
While engrained organizational culture can often be sought-after and seen as lending to
stability, some theorists suggest that adaptive and flexible cultures better position organizations
to prepare for a more diverse, complex, and changing world (Scharmer, 2007; Schein, 2004;
Senge, 1990). Successful organizations are ones that continually adapt and generate (Senge,
1990). This adaptive learning environment can be nurtured through the commitment to inquiry,
communication, diversity of thought, and a systems approach that acknowledges the complex
and connected nature of the world and its problems (Schein, 2004). Ultimately, one cannot force
a learning culture; it must consciously develop and evolve over time. Thereby, it is shared by all
members of the organization (Senge, 2014). The following sections will examine the literature
relevant to the teachers’ achievement of their professional learning goal as it relates to culture in
ISLA as a learning organization, specifically, the cultural models and settings related to the ISLA
faculty being able to achieve their goal.
Cultural models. Through the lens of a socio-culture framework, cultural models are the
internal (often hidden or invisible) beliefs and values present in an organization. Cultural models
are often perceived as barriers, yet if addressed in conjunction with knowledge and motivation,
they can also become opportunities for positive organizational growth (Hirbayashi, n.d.). This
section will review the literature related to some cultural models present at ISLA that may be
barriers or assets to stakeholder goal achievement, including organizational identity and
continuity, and conflict and creative friction.
Organizational identity and continuity. Identity is an essential element of organizational
growth (Schein, 2004). Building collective identity distinct to the whole organization bonds the
community and strengthens both the internal work and the external perception of the work
(Bolman & Deal, 2013). Employees, therefore, need to feel connected to a common purpose
across the entire organization to be most effective and engaged. Without a clear and shared
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

54
understanding of the brand of the organization, issues of retention and continuity will emerge
(Bolman & Deal, 2013). The development of organization-wide structures for collaboration,
capacity building, the telling of a shared story, and the development of shared, articulated norms
all support continuity (Bolman & Deal, 2013; Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, & Pittenger, 2014;
Garmston & Wellman, 2016; Schein, 2004; Senge, 2014; Stearns, Banerjee, Moler, &
Mickelson, 2015).
Conflict and creative friction. Organizations can often resort to silence, that is when
employees collectively withhold information or do not openly communicate concerns. This
“climate of silence” (p. 708) can result from organizational policies and structures, or managerial
practices that inhibit honest, open interactions and the flow of information (Morrison & Milliken,
2000). Teachers must be encouraged and made to feel safe to take risks, engage perceived
conflicts, and participate in creative friction (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Garmston & Wellman,
2016; LeFevre, 2014; Mayeaux, & Olivier, 2013). As teachers shift from working in silos, where
both their physical and psychological spaces have been traditionally privatized and isolated, to
more collaborative and greater continuities across their complex systems, healthy conflict and
creative friction should be encouraged, engaged, and celebrated (Garmston & Wellman, 2016).
Communities that do so are found to have greater leverage towards growth (Garmston &
Wellman, 2016; Senge, 2014).
Cultural settings. Cultural settings are the visible manifestations, outcomes, or results of
the cultural models (Hirbayashi, n.d.). These settings can be physically viewed, observed, or
studied. This section reviews literature related to specific cultural settings at ISLA that may be
barriers or assets to stakeholder goal achievement, including teacher support systems, models
and mentors, and communication of organizational values and expectations.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

55
Support systems. Recognizing that teaching is inherently a stressful profession and
requires a profound knowledge base about pedagogy, teachers must have adequate systems in
place to support both their well-being and professional learning (Collie, Shapka, Perry, &
Martin, 2015; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Kipps-Vaughan, 2013; Marzano, 2012; Seligman, 2012).
There is a positive relationship between teacher support and student achievement; teachers are
more effective in the classroom when there are intentional supports in place (Hanover, 2012).
This support is not without its challenge. Teacher preparation, induction, and professional
development are often uncoordinated. This lack of coordination presents a significant challenge
in focusing levels of support for teachers (Wilson, Rozelle, & Mikeska, 2011). Support systems
that specifically address teacher stress have been found to improve peer support, clarity in
teacher roles, and general job satisfaction while also reducing complaints and work pressure
(Kipps-Vaughan, 2013).
Teachers also need supports for professional learning to become more successful with
their craft and develop instructional expertise. Dimensions of professional support include
multiple and diverse opportunities for professional learning, specialized support staff,
appropriately targeted materials, and a common focus. Leadership that works together at both the
building level and district office level play an important role in professional learning that
effectively translates to the classroom (Elfers, Lucero, Stritikus, & Knapp, 2013). Along with
self-directed professional learning connected to change in the school and part of an overall
strategic plan, high quality, on-going onsite support integrated into a teacher’s daily activities is
found to be the most effective form of professional development (Hanover, 2012).
Mentors and models. Mentoring and the opportunity to learn from role models in the
system supports improvement in teaching and job satisfaction. Mentoring supports teachers
towards developing trustful relationships (Martin, Buelow, & Hoffman, 2016) and provides
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

56
models needed for student-centered teaching and learning (Estes, 2004; Van Leeuwen &
Westwood, 2008). Providing teachers with a coach or mentor promotes professional learning
within the daily practice over a continuous period (Hanover, 2012). Therefore, providing
teachers with opportunities for mentoring supports teachers in developing their craft and
increasing their levels of engagement and satisfaction.
Communication and organizational values. Clark and Estes (2008) assert that
organizational messaging, policies, and procedures must align with the goals and values of the
institution for change efforts to succeed. Additionally, the espoused values and beliefs must also
align with the messages as well as actual practice (Schein, 2004). To develop a strong
professional learning experience at ISLA that builds teacher capacity and increases teacher
engagement and retention rates, teachers must not only have clear communication about
expectations (Kushman, 1992; Le Fevre, 2014; Schein, 2004; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996;
Senge, 1990; Senge, 2014), but that communication must also both support and align with the
values of the institution and be reflected in the policies and procedures (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Schein, 2004).
Table 4 below illustrates a summary of organizational influences and related assessments
necessary for the teachers at International School of Latin America to achieve the goal of
implementing student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

57
Table 4
Organizational Influences
Organizational Mission
The mission of the International School of Latin America (ISLA) is to empower students to live
meaningful lives characterized by active engagement in their own learning, pursuit of personal
excellence, intellectual risk-taking, social consciousness, and contribution to both local and global
community.

Organizational Global Goal
By September 2017, International School of Latin America will implement a professional development
program which is focused on student-centered learning and consistent across all sections of the school.

Stakeholder Goal
By September 2018, 100% of the teaching faculty will implement student-centered teaching and
learning practices from the professional development program in their daily activities.

Assumed Organizational
Influences

Organizational
Influence Assessment
Research-Based
Recommendation or
Solution Principle

Proposed Solution
Cultural Model Influence:
Organizational identity
and continuity. There is a
culture of high overseas-
hire turnover, which
impacts organizational
identity and continuity
across sections and
programs at the school.

Interviews about what
the school could
potentially do to
increase retention rates
at the school.

The development of
organizational identity is
essential for organizational
growth (Schein, 2004).

Espoused values and beliefs
must align with messages
and concrete practices
(Clark & Estes, 2008;
Schein, 2004).

Shared interest, practitioner
involvement, and
community orientation are
three key principles for
organizational growth
(Berbary & Malinchak,
2011).

Teachers often feel
professional development is
disconnected from their
daily experience.
(Archibald, Coggshall,
Croft, & Goe, 2011).

When organizations
establish processes
collaboratively, performance

Teachers must receive
clear communication
about expectations.
Implement a job aid
regarding expectations,
organizational goals, and
elements of collective
efficacy. See other
communication
recommendations below.

Consider a pluralistic
model for resource
allocation (time and
financial) for professional
development.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

58
increases (Clark & Estes,
2008).

Building of collective
identity improves the way
that work is perceived
(Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Developing structures that
support collaboration linked
to capacity building makes
continuity and
connectedness more likely
(Bolman & Deal, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman,
2016; Schein, 2004; Senge,
2014).

Cultural Model Influence:
Conflict and creative
friction. There is a culture
of politeness at the school
that creates a warm
working environment, yet
also hinders creative
friction interactions and
open, honest feedback.

Survey questions and
interviews that
determine the level to
which faculty feel
comfortable engaging in
intellectual discourse.
To encourage growth,
teachers must feel safe to
engage and participate in
expressing differences of
opinion or divergent
perspectives
(Csikszentmihalyi, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman,
2016; LeFevre, 2014;
Mayeaux, & Olivier, 2013).

Organizations that place
value on the role conflict
pays in developing
community, experience
greater growth (Garmston &
Wellman, 2016; Senge,
2014).
Model the engagement of
creative friction at the
leadership levels.

Generate alternative ways
for stakeholders to
express their ideas.

Encourage stakeholders to
present alternative
viewpoints to help
address or solve
problems.

Recognize, reward, or
otherwise acknowledge
publicly when employees
present divergent points
of view or engage in
healthy creative friction.
Cultural Setting Influence:
Support systems and
feedback. There is lack of
structured support systems
for teachers.
Survey questions and
interviews exploring
feelings about support,
peer coaching,
collaboration,
interventions, and
teacher supervision
models.

Support systems that are
self-directed, site-based, and
connect directly to the
strategic plan are found to
increase both teacher
effectiveness and student
achievement (Hanover,
2012).

Goal setting is an important
self-regulatory strategy that
enhances learning and
performance (APA, 2015:
Dembo & Eaton, 2000;
Denler, et al., 2009).

Using data for decision-
making improves
accountability and

Implement an on-site
teacher mentor program.

Employ goal setting
practices schoolwide.

Administrators participate
in training that equips
them with both cognitive
coaching tools and the
understanding of how to
effectively drive goal
setting and data work in
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

59
organizational performance
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Accountability measures
should be contextualized
and under constant review as
part of an evolving process
(Conner & Rabovsky, 2011;
Darling-Hammond &
Snyder, 2015; Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004).

School leaders play an
important role in building
capacity (Waters, Marzano,
& McNulty, 2003) and using
data (Marsh & Farrell,
2015).

Policies must reflect the
values and goals of the
institution and are more
successful when crafted
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Schein, 2004).
their school through
effective feedback loops.

Consider wider
understanding and
involvement of teachers
in policy development
and evaluation.
Cultural Setting Influence:
Mentors and models.
There is a lack of mentors
and role models in the
school for true student-
centered teaching.
Survey questions and
interviews about the
ways in which faculty
can identify student-
centered learning, and
what models they can
use outside of the school
environment.

Support systems that are
self-directed, site-based, and
connect directly to the
strategic plan are found to
increase both teacher
effectiveness and student
achievement (Hanover,
2012).

Goal setting is an important
self-regulatory strategy that
enhances learning and
performance (APA, 2015:
Dembo & Eaton, 2000;
Denler, et al., 2009).

Using data for decision-
making improves
accountability and
organizational performance
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Accountability measures
should be contextualized
and under constant review as
part of an evolving process
(Conner & Rabovsky, 2011;
Darling-Hammond &
Snyder, 2015; Hentschke &
Wohlstetter, 2004).

Implement an on-site
teacher mentor program.

Employ goal setting
practices schoolwide.

Administrators participate
in training that equips
them with both cognitive
coaching tools and the
understanding of how to
effectively drive goal
setting and data work in
their school through
effective feedback loops.

Consider wider
understanding and
involvement of teachers
in policy development
and evaluation.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

60

School leaders play an
important role in building
capacity (Waters, Marzano,
& McNulty, 2003) and using
data (Marsh & Farrell,
2015).

Policies must reflect the
values and goals of the
institution and are more
successful when crafted
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Schein, 2004).

Cultural Setting Influence:
Communication and
organizational values.
There is lack of clear
communication of
expectations and values
held by the institution.

Interview questions
about past and current
communication and
survey questions about
clarity of
communication in
relation to expectations
and values of the
institution.
Organizational changes take
root when beliefs and values
within the organization are
shared among its members.
(Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo,
1996).

Stakeholders who use the
same language and have
common understandings
about the change are more
likely to be successful in
their endeavors (Gartner,
n.d.).

Leveraging communication
towards that success
involves multi-directional
engagement (Lewis, 2011).
Solicitation:
Continually take the pulse
of stakeholders and work
to understand their unique
perspectives.

Instill a Listening Tour
and make a related action
plan to make solicitation
of input more concrete.

Dissemination:
Repeat communications.

Communicate the same
message to all key
stakeholders.

Cascade communication:
create methods of
communication that
moves through the
organization from level to
level, and then back again
through feedback loops.

Change of Role Schema:
Rethink roles in the
institution.

Provide opportunity for
all stakeholders first to
understand the
possibilities in the
imagining of new roles.

Provide opportunity for
all stakeholders to
practice operating in the
new role as imagined.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

61
Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation and Organization
A conceptual framework is the explanation of the interaction and relationships between
the various factors represented in a study (Maxwell, 2013). The purpose of the conceptual
framework is to coalesce the ideas presented in the literature (theoretical and empirical) with
personal experience and thought experiments to construct an understanding and tentative theory
about the interactions, i.e. what is happening and why (Slayton, n.d.). This constructed theory
placed in the context of previous research is then used to determine how the study can further
build on or contribute to what has already been done (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual
framework both justifies the research and assists in identifying the most appropriate methods for
exploring the research questions (Maxwell, 2011). Therefore, the conceptual framework
presented here considers the previous body of research on teacher engagement with professional
development and the conditions that lead to Teacher Flow within such a program. The
framework, practically, then puts that previous research in context with the pending innovation
for a comprehensive P-12 professional development program that best supports Teacher Flow
and the achievement of the stakeholder goal at the International School of Latin America. As the
previous research is considered in context, this assists the researcher in identifying the methods
that are most appropriate for the particular organizational needs at ISLA. Therefore, this
constructed framework and the convergence of the following worldviews further inform the
study.
Two worldviews converge to inform this study: a constructivism worldview and a
pragmatic worldview. Constructivism is the worldview that seeks, as the name implies, to
“construct” meaning from and generate explanations about phenomena (Creswell, 2014), which
this study aims to do regarding the environment that best supports teachers achieving a state of
flow. A constructivist researcher looks at “the processes of interaction among individuals”
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

62
(Creswell, 2014, p. 8) and the meaning subjectively made through the personal interaction.
However, pragmatism also informs this work. Pragmatism is the worldview that “arises out of
actions, situations, and consequences rather than antecedent conditions” (Creswell, 2014, p. 10).
In this paradigm, the concern is the application, what will work in the situation, and the use of
multiple approaches to address the research problem, in this case, lack of teacher engagement.
While constructivism offers the necessary perspective of meaning making, and the why around
an environment that best supports Teacher Flow, pragmatism offers a view also significant for
this study. Pragmatism allows for a cross section of methods and procedures and helps
understand the problem from multiple perspectives, while also generating new knowledge
(Creswell, 2014). Pragmatism allows the study to take a next step with the constructed meaning
and concerns itself with what will practically work within the ISLA context and its unique
influences.
While each of the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are
presented previously as separate elements affecting teacher engagement in the ISLA professional
development program, these three elements are intertwined and do not operate in isolation.
Rather, knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs must be addressed simultaneously for
goal achievement to occur (Clark & Estes, 2008). This conceptual framework presented here
introduces the ways in which knowledge and motivation work in tandem within the International
School of Latin America organizational context to achieve the goal of 100% of teaching faculty
implementing student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities, while also supporting the experience of Teacher
Flow. Figure 1 below illustrates this conceptual framework.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

63

Figure 1

Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational
Cultural Models and Settings
Key

Organization

Global Goal/
Innovation

Stakeholder
Influences

Phenomenon

Simultaneous
interaction

Interaction leads
to

Teacher Flow
Teacher experience: high degree of
engagement; intense focus; clear goals and a
feedback loop; and feels appropriately
challenged and intrinsically rewarded
Teacher Knowledge
• Declarative/Conceptual:
teacher professional
expectations
• Declarative/Conceptual:
student-centered learning
strategies
• Metacognitive: student-
centered vs. teacher-
centered learning

Teacher Motivation
• Utility value: student-
centered learning
strategies
• Intrinsic: engagement in
the professional
development process
• Individual and collective
self-efficacy: creating
student-centered learning
environments

Stakeholder Goal
100% of the teaching faculty will
implement student-centered teaching and
learning practices in their daily activities.

International School of
Latin America
Cultural Models: Organizational identity and continuity,
conflict and creative friction; Cultural Settings: teacher
support systems, mentors and models, and communication of
institutional values

P-12 Professional Development Program

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

64
This figure outlines the relationship between the factors influencing teacher engagement
with the ISLA professional development program, both with each other and within the larger
organizational context, leading to the achievement of the Teacher Flow phenomenon and the
stakeholder goal. Specifically, in the figure the larger blue circle represents the International
School of Latin America as the organization of study and the cultural settings and models that
exist within. These cultural influences include organizational culture around issues of identity
and continuity, communication of values, (Kushman, 1992; Le Fevre, 2014; Schein, 2004;
Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996; Senge, 1990) conflict and creative friction (Csikszentmihalyi,
2013; Garmston & Wellman, 2016; LeFevre, 2014; Mayeaux, & Olivier, 2013; Morrison &
Milliken, 2000; Senge, 2014), and supports and structures that impact teacher well-being and
professional learning (Collie, Shapka, Perry, & Martin, 2015; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Killion,
2013; Kipps-Vaughan, 2013; Marzano, 2012; Nudell, 2005; Rodgers, 2002; Seligman, 2012).
Within the organization, there is the innovation that grounds the subject of this study, the
global goal of the implementation of a P-12 professional development program, illustrated in the
figure as a green circle. Within the global goal are the knowledge and motivation influences that
affect teacher engagement with professional development. The knowledge influences include
declarative and conceptual in relation to school-wide expectations and both declarative and
metacognitive in relation to student-centered learning strategies. The motivation influences
include utility value in relation to student-centered learning strategies, intrinsic motivation and
engagement in the professional development process, and individual and collective self-efficacy
in relation to creating student-centered learning environments. These influences must also
interact with one another for the achievement of the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Lauman, 2011;
Mayer, 2011). Interacting with each other and within the larger organizational context, these
influences are represented in parallel and connected black circles and are addressed
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

65
simultaneously to best support growth towards the stakeholder goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
This study also seeks to understand the ways in which teacher knowledge, motivation,
and organization influences interact with each other to best support the phenomenon of Teacher
Flow, defined in Chapter One as the state in which teachers are fully aware and engaged in the
act of facilitating learning. In this state, teachers feel appropriately challenged and intensely
focused, have clear goals and a feedback loop, and are intrinsically rewarded by the teaching
experience (Basom & Frase, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013). The achievement of the state of
Teacher Flow is essential for optimal teacher engagement (Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014;
Bakker, 2005; Klem & Connell, 2004) and corollary optimal student performance (Klem &
Connell, 2004). Therefore, Figure 1 situates Teacher Flow as the phenomenon resulting from the
knowledge and motivation interactions within the professional development program and the
organization. The figure represents the achievement of this phenomenon by an arrow pointing to
the purple oval containing Teacher Flow. When these elements interact with one another, they
then lead to the achievement of the stakeholder goal, denoted as an orange rectangle. Therefore,
this conceptual framework offers the tentative theory that if knowledge and motivation within
the student-centered professional development program and issues of organizational culture are
addressed simultaneously, setting the conditions for Teacher Flow to occur, then achievement of
the stakeholder goal will be more likely.
Conclusion
This innovation study seeks to identify the resources necessary to reach the International
School of Latin America goal of implementing a comprehensive P-12 professional development
program that ensures implementation of student-centered teaching and learning strategies into
daily activities, while also best supporting the achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow.
To inform this study, this chapter has reviewed the literature related to teacher engagement in
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

66
professional learning programs. This review has outlined teacher satisfaction and the concept of
Teacher Flow, as well as current trends and strategies for teacher engagement and support. This
literature review process has informed the identification of the assumed knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences specifically related to the achievement of the stakeholder goal and
the experience of Teacher Flow at ISLA. The knowledge influences include declarative and
conceptual about school-wide expectations and both declarative and metacognitive concerning
student-centered learning strategies. The motivation influences include utility value about
student-centered learning strategies, intrinsic motivation related to engagement in the
professional development process, and individual and collective self-efficacy about creating
student-centered learning environments. Finally, the organizational influences include school
culture around issues of identity and continuity, communication of values, and supports and
structures that impact teacher well-being and professional learning. Chapter Three describes the
validation process for these influences.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

67
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction to the Methodology
This innovation study sought to identify the resources necessary to reach the International
School of Latin America goal of implementing a comprehensive P-12 professional development
program that ensures implementation of student-centered teaching and learning strategies into
daily activities, while also best supporting the achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow.
This study utilized the gap analysis framework with an embedded mixed methods design,
layering multiple forms of quantitative and qualitative data within a larger phenomenological
research design (Creswell, 2014). This chapter further outlines the research design and
methodology, data collection and instrumentation, and outlines the data analysis.
The questions guiding this study are:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for P-12
teachers to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices from the
professional development program in their daily activities?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements necessary in the
professional environment to further support the teachers achieving the phenomenon
of flow in their implementation of the professional development program?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and the teachers’
knowledge and motivation to implement student-centered teaching and learning
practices in their daily activities?
4. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to
those needs?
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

68
The chapter begins with a description of the participating stakeholders and continues with
an explanation of the methods used and sampling criteria for both the quantitative and qualitative
phases of the study.
Sampling and Recruitment
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for this study is the International School of Latin America
teachers. This population consists of 206 full-time teachers in grades preschool through grade 12,
across disciplines. There is an average of 15 full-time teachers at each grade level. This study
seeks to develop a sample of teachers who accurately represent the entire teacher population at
the school. The sampling included representation of both overseas and locally-hired teachers, and
teachers who engage in leadership positions. The study sought to involve as many of these
teachers in the survey as possible and a stratified random sample of teachers in the focus groups.
The survey (both quantitative and qualitative) was conducted in both English and Spanish to
make the study most accessible to all teachers in the sample. The focus groups were conducted in
English.
Given that there were convergent uses of data in this embedded mixed-methods research
design, the participants were selected for different purposes and, thus, the researcher used
different sampling methods for each set of data. Therefore, subjects were chosen using mixed
purposeful sampling, a method that allows for the use of multiple sampling strategies. This
method is commonly used when the researcher is triangulating data (Johnson & Christenson,
2014). For the quantitative portion of this study, the survey was sent to all teachers who had
served at least one year at the school. For the qualitative part of the study, the sampling was
random and purposive. The study followed a parallel relation, meaning that both quantitative and
qualitative data derived from the same population. Both phases of the study took place at the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

69
same time. Thus, the sampling design was parallel concurrent. The following sections describe
each of the methods used in the sampling and recruitment for the various pieces of data
collected, including survey and focus groups.
Survey Sampling Strategy, Criteria, and Rationale
The main reason a researcher uses sampling in quantitative research is “to make accurate
generalizations about a population using sample data” (Johnson & Christenson, 2014, p. 249).
The quantitative survey data in this study, therefore, provides the researcher with the opportunity
to generalize about the ISLA teacher population regarding survey questions about the
knowledge, motivation, and organization influences related to student-centered learning and
professional learning at ISLA. In an effort to gather as large a sample as possible, the research
sent the survey to all qualifying teachers at the school (those who had been full-time teachers at
the school for at least one year.) Discussed in Chapter Four, the following criteria was stratified
and applied in analysis:
Criterion 1. Hiring classification. The teachers at ISLA fall into either one of two
distinct categories: overseas or locally-hired teachers. To assure adequate representation of both
groups of teachers, it is important for the sampling to stratify based on hiring classification.
Approximately 40% of teachers fall into the overseas-hire category and 60% fall into the local-
hire category.
Criterion 2. Teacher leadership. ISLA has many formal teacher leadership positions in
place. Currently, approximately one-quarter of the teacher population serves in grade level,
department, or instructional leadership positions. It will be important to understand survey
participation with both teacher leaders and teachers who are not currently in leadership roles to
accurately reflect the total population and the teacher experience in the school.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

70
Criterion 3. Current teaching level. There are 14 different grade levels at ISLA, which
span across four different sections of the school (Early Childhood, Elementary, Middle School,
and High School). Sixty-eight teachers (26%) currently teach in the Early Childhood section.
Forty-six teachers (18%) teach in the Elementary section. Forty teachers (15%) teach in the
Middle School. Fifty-two teachers (25%) teach in the High School. To accurately reflect the
entire teacher population and the teacher experience in regards to the implementation of student-
centered learning strategies from the professional development program across all the sections of
the school, analysis is also stratified by level.
The researcher needed to obtain at least 20-30 participants in each stratum to make the
data in stratified sampling statistically meaningful (Fink, 2013). Due to the researcher’s previous
experience conducting surveys with this population, and regular high response rates, there was
no indication that an incentive was necessary and therefore was not offered during the
recruitment. This benchmark was achieved, as outlined in Chapter Four.
The researcher allowed for up to three weeks for respondents to complete the survey. The
researcher sent an email reminder to all those qualified to participate during the last week the
survey was open. This quantitative phase took place concurrently with the qualitative phase. The
next section describes the sampling for the qualitative phase.
Focus Group Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Focus groups are a method of qualitative data collection in which interviews are
conducted in small groups. These small, homogenous groupings are a viable choice for
interviews when the topics are considered something easily discussable in the everyday, yet for
whatever reason, are not usually discussed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Through this structured
interview process, focus groups socially construct an interactive discussion to make meaning
around a particular topic and provide insight into the beliefs, values, or opinions (Krueger &
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

71
Casey, 2009; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study utilized focus groups as a means to
qualitatively construct meaning regarding the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to the implementation of the ISLA professional development program and the
achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. The focus groups also considered the
interaction of these influences and how they practically relate to the organizational context and
culture of ISLA. Focus groups in noncommercial or social science settings are thought to best
consist of three to eight participants (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Although Merriam and Tisdell
(2016) state there is no hard and fast rule for focus group size, the researcher aimed to form
focus groups of five teachers in each of the groups to maximize participation. A total of 15
teachers participated in these focus groups. The following were the criteria for the formation of
the three separate focus groups.
Criterion 1. Teacher leadership. Teachers holding leadership positions at the school are
a significant part of the population (25%) and could provide particular insight into the research
questions and related influences. Teacher leadership was also identified in the literature (Chapter
Two) as a contributor to the possibility of Teacher Flow. Therefore, this was an important
subgroup to include as a focus group as a component of the larger design. Four teacher leaders
made up this first focus group. Teacher leadership was also present in all of the three focus
groups. A total of eight teacher leaders participated across the three focus groups.
Criterion 2. Locally-hired teachers. Teachers holding a Latin American passport and
hired on what is considered a local contract comprise 60% of the teacher population. These
teachers typically stay for extended periods at the school and have been known to “grow with the
institution” (personal communication, Director, 2016). This perspective, as a subgroup of the
larger population, is vital to understanding the core beliefs and values surrounding the interaction
of the KMO influences on both the implementation of student-centered learning practices from
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

72
the professional development program and the ability to achieve a state of Teacher Flow. All
local participants randomly selected for this focus group were bilingual and thus the focus group
was conducted in English. Five local teachers participated in the second focus group. Between
the teacher leaders and local hires, seven locally-hired teachers participated across the focus
groups.
Criterion 3. Overseas-hired teachers. Teachers who hold a passport outside of Latin
American are classified as overseas-hires, officially visiting fellows of the university foundation
that supports the school. They also make up approximately 40% of the total teacher population.
These are teachers who typically stay for a two or three-year contract and then move on
(personal communication, Director of Human Resources, November 13, 2016). They are
considered “visitors” in both the school and the country and often bring with them experiences
and expertise from outside the country (personal communication, Director, July 14, 2016). This
sample was an important group to study within the organization. This population provided
valuable insight into the teacher experience at ISLA about the resources necessary for the
implementation of knowledge and motivation elements related to student-centered learning
strategies and the achievement of the state of Teacher Flow. Six overseas-hired teachers
participated in the third focus group. Between the teacher leaders and overseas-hires, eight
overseas-hired teachers participated across the focus groups.
Focus Group Sampling and Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
While these focus groups are intentionally homogenous in nature (through the common
features explained previously), the sampling also remained random to reduce selection bias
(Krueger & Casey, 2009) and remain reflective of the population (Johnson & Christenson, 2014).
Therefore, the researcher utilized simple random sampling to do so. All those who were eligible
in each of the three homogenous groups thus had an equal chance at participation (Fink, 2013).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

73
The three focus groups took place concurrently with the quantitative survey in the same
general time frame. One focus group meeting was conducted each week, over the course of a
three-week period. As with the survey, due to the researcher’s experience conducting focus
groups with this population, and the previous high degree of active participation, there was no
indication that an incentive was necessary and therefore none was offered during the recruitment.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The two primary methods of data collection chosen for this study were surveys and focus
group interviews. These methods provide the researcher both quantitative and qualitative
understanding and insight into the way the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
influences at ISLA work together to impact consistent implementation of student-centered
teaching and learning strategies from professional development into the teachers’ daily activities,
while also supporting the achievement of Teacher Flow. This section discusses the two specific
methods used to collect data, particularly surveys and focus groups.
Surveys
The researcher administered the surveys used in this study via an online link through
Qualtrics. The researcher circulated the surveys in both English and Spanish through email. The
instrument was created first in English and then translated into Spanish by a certified translator.
The quantitative survey consisted of demographic questions and 99 survey items; 29 items
assessed knowledge, 23 items assessed motivation, and 47 items assessed the organizational
influences. Based on field testing, the survey took approximately 20 minutes for participants to
complete. Appendix A presents the survey protocol.
Focus Groups
In a semi-structured format, the researcher qualitatively explored 22 questions with each
focus group within a one to one and a half-hour period. The questions explored in the focus
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

74
groups related directly to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs identified in the
literature review and the constructed theory/conceptual framework. The focus groups were one-
time semi-structured interviews, carried out over the course of a three-week period. This
approach allowed the researcher to compare across the three focus groups while also allowing
each group to construct meaning through an open-ended conversation. This approach also
allowed the researcher to gain understanding around specific ideas, while also leaving space for
ideas important to each group (that may have not previously been considered) to bubble to the
surface in the moment (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher conducted the focus groups in
a neutral location located on the school campus. Appendix B presents the Focus Group Protocol.
Data Analysis
Data analysis is the process of making meaning from the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
For this study, the researcher conducted the quantitative and qualitative data analysis in the same
manner as the data collection: concurrently. The researcher went back and forth between the
quantitative survey data and the qualitative transcriptions of the focus groups throughout the
analysis process. This section describes the systematic process.
In conducting the analysis for the quantitative data, the researcher calculated measures of
central tendency (mean) and dispersion (range and standard deviation) for ratio data. These
measures provide further quantitative understanding of the participants (Johnson & Christenson,
2014). Frequencies of responses were calculated for ordinal data. The survey was conducted
using the software Qualtrics, and thus the tool also supported analysis, especially for cross
tabulations between data points to aid in disaggregation. Survey items are presented in narrative
form as well as with visualizations and tables in Chapter Four.
In conducting analysis for the qualitative focus group data, the researcher employed
several strategies and tools. Following each focus group, the researcher reviewed the recordings
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

75
to assure they were complete. The researcher took additional notes while reviewing the
recordings to capture specific thoughts. A transcription service was contracted to complete the
focus group transcripts. Once the transcriptions were received and reviewed for accuracy, the
researcher deleted the recordings to maintain confidentiality of participants. In reviewing the
transcripts for accuracy, the researcher engaged in member checking.
The coding was completed in multiple phases. The first phase of coding employed open
coding strategy. After the phase of open coding, the researcher reviewed the transcripts again,
looking for empirical codes as well as a priori codes as they related to the literature and
conceptual framework. The next phase of the process was the development of a transcript
codebook organized by pattern codes and themes that emerged from the empirical and a priori
codes. This codebook also supported the documentation of any conflicting codes or counter
examples, and therefore assisted the researcher in assuring that the report of the findings
holistically and accurately documented and represented the exploration into the research
questions.
To document the entire analysis process, the researcher utilized an Excel workbook, with
sheets for each of the data sets related to Knowledge, Motivation, Organization, and Flow (the
overarching phenomenon guiding the study) for the quantitative data and the codebook for the
qualitative data. The codebook served as a valuable method to account for typicality of the codes
within and across the three focus groups.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
First and foremost, this study acknowledged that the researcher is the instrument in the
qualitative phase of the research. The qualitative phase brought with it inherent bias (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). This section describes the steps the researcher took to minimize that inherent bias
and increase credibility and trustworthiness through all phases of the research.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

76
In the research design, this study worked to increase credibility by carefully connecting
the methods to what is appropriate for the context as well as connected to the body of literature
that informs the conceptual framework. The design choices and interview questions were
randomly member checked and field tested on the site, in both English and Spanish. This field
testing assessed appropriateness for the site, in both question content and length. In addition, the
random sampling employed in this study lent itself to increased credibility. The study also
triangulated the survey data with the focus group interviews. Using the method of triangulation
safeguarded against researcher bias and increases the credibility of the study (Creswell, 2009;
Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As the multiple sources of data converge, when they
were found to validate one other, credibility further increases (McMillan, 2004; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
During the data collection phase of the study, the researcher engaged in a strategy called
“adequate engagement in data collection.” This method requires the researcher to spend an
adequate amount of time collecting the data until the “emerging findings… feel saturated”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p 246). In this way, the same types of findings and themes continually
emerge, with no new revelations or information surfacing. To test the credibility of the findings,
the researcher actively sought ideas and examples that countered the emerging themes, both
within each of the qualitative methods chosen and any necessary follow-up.
As mentioned previously in the ethics section, the researcher is neither an evaluator nor
direct supervisor of teachers at the school, yet the researcher holds a department director position
parallel to the teachers’ immediate supervisors. Therefore, it is vital for developing credibility
that participants understand that their engagement in the study is held in confidence. During data
collection, the researcher provided statements in writing as well as verbally regarding
confidentiality and remained committed to confidentiality throughout the process. This
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

77
confidentiality lends itself to increased credibility and trustworthiness so teachers feel
comfortable in responding to the survey and interview questions honestly and openly (Creswell,
2014). In explaining confidentiality, the researcher also acknowledged and explained the
investigator held biases to the participants, including the researcher as a member of the
community and leader within the organization and the researcher’s hiring classification in one of
the distinct sampling groups. Additionally, participants had the opportunity to opt out of the
study at any time throughout its duration. Providing this explanation and explicit understanding
lends itself to greater credibility and trustworthiness (Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
Through the analysis and during reporting, the researcher continued to engage in self-
reflection regarding held biases, assumptions, perspective, and worldview. The researcher kept a
separate journal related to each of the data collection methods outlined here to document
questions, reactions, and areas requiring further clarification. These notes allowed the researcher
the opportunity to further reflect on positionality in the organization, especially that of being an
insider in the organization and holding a director role. As Merriam and Tisdell (2016) remind us,
power dynamics are always present. The researcher paid critical attention to this throughout the
research process and subsequent reflections.
Finally, the reporting phase included rich descriptions of the findings. The researcher
worked to include descriptions, quotations, and detailed information drawn from the context as
they connect to the research questions into the reporting. This thick description and, thus,
increased transparency of the process, lent greater credibility to the study. The reporting also
connected the discussion of the findings and recommendations back to the literature. This
referencing grounds the reporting in previously conducted research and increases credibility in
the recommendations (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
In summary, this study acknowledges that there are multiple ways human beings
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

78
experience phenomena and the resulting narrative they form about their experience. Research
reminds us of the virtual impossibility of truly “captur[ing] reality” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p.
243). As the instrument in qualitative research, the researcher must be trustworthy and conduct
the study ethically. The validity of the findings relies on this trustworthiness.
Validity and Reliability
The methods of sampling, both with the survey and the focus groups, lend themselves to
validity and reliability. The participants were selected both randomly and purposefully, which
reduces selection bias and increases reliability (Krueger & Casey, 2009). The researcher aimed
to have 80% of the population take part in the study, across the previously identified constituents
reflective of the various groups. This number of participants contributes to greater validity in the
study, providing enough data to reliably generalize about the population (Johnson & Christenson,
2014). In the end, the participation totaled 59%, allowing the researcher to generalize about the
study population, but not generalize to other contexts.
Threats to validity in this study include historical threat (because of a new director
joining the school as the study commenced) and possible diffusion of treatment, especially
because the study took place over a 3-week period. While this period is a relatively short time,
reducing any threat of maturation, regression, or mortality, it also could lend itself to the
participants cross contaminating. That said, an important reason for purposefully choosing focus
groups as a method of data collection is that it allows for ideas to be mutually constructed
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, contamination as a threat to validity applies only to the
quantitative phase of the study. To circumvent this threat, the researcher provided a statement in
the survey email requesting participants to not discuss the survey with colleagues until a
specified date. Ultimately, the reliability then lies upon the respondents to participate honestly,
openly, and with fidelity according to the survey instructions.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

79
Ethics
This study is grounded in the importance of acting ethically before, during, and following
the study. Therefore, to conduct the study ethically, the researcher considered several
responsibilities. These researcher responsibilities may take precedence over “the goal of seeking
new knowledge” (p.164, Glesne, 2011). These considerations included informed consent, data
handling, and confidentiality.
An essential element of any study and the Institutional Review Board (IRB) process is
that of informed consent (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). Researchers have an obligation to assure no
harm to their participants (Glesne, 2011). As a study involving human subjects, the investigator
of this study had a responsibility to ensure that all participation was informed participation.
Therefore, the researcher informed participants of their protection through the University of
Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP). The researcher obtained a
signed Informed Consent for Non-Medical Research form (Appendix C) from each focus group
member and provided survey participants with the Information Fact Sheet for Exempt Non-
Medical Research (Appendix D). Through informed consent, the sample population gains
knowledge about participation being voluntary and any potential risks involved in participation
(Glesne, 2011). Throughout all phases of the study, the researcher declared that all participation
(whether participants choose to be involved or not) was confidential and at no time would the
researcher share any of the names of participants with their supervisors. The researcher also
reminded each focus group that it is also an important responsibility of theirs to hold our
conversation in confidence. Each participant could cease involvement in the study at any time.
Therefore, in writing at the beginning of the survey and verbally at the onset of the focus groups,
the researcher affirmed that any decision to not participate in the study would in no way affect
opportunities for participants to advance in the organization.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

80
At the onset of each focus group, the researcher also requested permission to record
audio. All focus group participants agreed to the recording. Following each focus group, the
researcher contracted a service to transcribe the interviews verbatim. The transcriptions were
coded with pseudonyms for confidentiality. The researcher destroyed all files following
transcription and stored all data temporarily outside of any of the organization’s databases during
the analysis phases.
In conducting this study, the researcher assumes:
• Teachers at ISLA want the school to improve; and,
• Teachers will answer questions in both surveys and focus groups honestly and
accurately.
There are also inherent biases the researcher needed to account for as the study
commenced. These biases include:
• The researcher as a member of the community and leader within the organization;
• Within the two distinct groups of participants in the research study, the researcher
falls into the category of “overseas-hire;” and,
• The researcher has over twenty-years’ experience in the field of study, as a
teacher, leader, author, and consultant.
While the researcher is neither an evaluator nor direct supervisor of teachers at the
school, the researcher holds a department director position. This position, classified as
administration, is parallel to the teachers’ immediate supervisors as a colleague. Therefore, an
important aspect of this research remaining ethically sound was the explicit understanding that
participation in the study would continue to be confidential, both during the study as well as
following the study’s completion.
Additionally, the role of the researcher carries with it some potential ethical dilemmas as
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

81
a result of the data gathering. In this case, the researcher is a member of the learning community
and also wants to see the institution grow towards its goals. The researcher, therefore, may have
been compelled to take on the role of either a “reformer” or “advocate.” The reformer may have
wished to intervene to try to fix something deemed to be unjust. The advocate may take a stance
on an issue which may arise from the research (Glesne, 2011). Again, every effort was made to
ensure participants’ understanding of complete confidentiality. This anonymity lent itself to
increased credibility and trustworthiness so that teachers would feel comfortable in responding to
the survey and interview questions honestly and opening (Creswell, 2014). Finally, the
researcher needed to stay mindful of these roles and possible dilemmas. Articulating and directly
facing these challenges will likely result in a more valid interpretation of the data (Glesne, 2011).
Limitations and Delimitations
There are limitations and delimitations the researcher must be aware of as this study
commences. Limitations are the factors that are not in the researcher’s locus of control. Some
limitations that exist for this study are:
• The study was dependent on the truthfulness of the respondents;
• The school has seen recent leadership turnover, specifically, a new director, which
may lend itself to historical threat to validity.
• The study was conducted during a relatively short period of time at the beginning
of a new academic year, making it dependent on the respondents’ mindset during
this limited and unique time of year in the life of a school.
Delimitations are the decisions the researcher makes that may have implications for the
study. The delimitations that affect this study include:
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

82
• Data collected was only from teachers. The data did not include administrator or
student perspectives.
• Data from each of the qualitative and quantitative phases was collected
concurrently.
• This study was conducted prior to the innovation being introduced, to best inform
implementation. It is therefore not an evaluative study.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

83
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This innovation study seeks to identify the resources necessary to reach the International
School of Latin America goal of implementing a comprehensive P-12 professional development
program that ensures implementation of student-centered teaching and learning strategies into
daily activities. This study also seeks to understand how the school can best support the
achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow within the P-12 program. This study has
utilized the gap analysis framework with an embedded mixed methods design. This chapter first
reviews the stakeholder participants in the study and then outlines the findings and results from
the teacher survey and focus group interviews in relation to the first three research questions:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for P-12
teachers to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices from the
professional development program in their daily activities?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements necessary in the
professional environment to further support the teachers achieving the phenomenon
of flow in their implementation of the professional development program?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and the teachers’
knowledge and motivation to implement student-centered teaching and learning
practices in their daily activities?
To address these research questions, the researcher conducted a 99-item online survey
and three focus groups. The data collection for this study took place over a three-week period at
the International School of Latin America. The survey was conducted in both English and
Spanish to make the study most accessible to all teachers in the sample. The researcher
conducted the focus groups in English. The final data consisted of 89 teachers completing the
survey, representing a 59% response rate. The survey took approximately 20 minutes to
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

84
complete. Three separate focus groups totaled 15 participants. The focus groups were
approximately one to one and a half hours each in length.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for this study is the International School of Latin America
teachers. This population consists of 206 full-time teachers in grades preschool through grade 12,
across disciplines. This study sought to develop a sample of teachers who represent the entire
teacher population at the school, yet excluded brand new teachers to the school due to their
inability to answer organizational specific questions so early in their tenure. Therefore, this
study, conducted in the first three weeks of a new school year, quantitatively and qualitatively
explored the research questions with only returning teachers who had been at the school for at
least one year. This section reviews the teachers who participated in the survey followed by a
description of the focus groups.
Survey Participants
The quantitative survey was sent by email to the 151 full-time teachers who had spent at
least one entire academic year as a full-time teacher at ISLA. Figure 2 shows how the four
sections on the school were represented in the quantitative phase of the study. Early Childhood
made up 21.35% of survey respondents; Elementary School teachers made up 28.09% of
respondents; Middle School made up 22.47% of respondents; and finally, High School
represented 28.09% of the sample.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

85
Figure 2

Survey Population by Section of the School

The study sought to develop a sample that represented all grade levels at the school, from
preschool through grade 12. Table 5 shows the grade levels represented in the survey. Based on
89 respondents, across fourteen grade levels, equal representation would be 6.36% per grade
level. All grade levels were in fact represented well and within an acceptable range. The range of
representation is from the lowest represented grade level being first grade at 4.61% to the most
represented grade level being 11
th
grade at 9.87%.

Table 5
Grade Level Representation
Current Grade
Level Teaching

Percentage of teachers
in the study representing
this grade level

Preschool 5.92%
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

86
Kindergarten 7.89%
First Grade 4.61%
Second Grade 6.58%
Third Grade 7.89%
Fourth Grade 6.58%
Fifth Grade 6.58%
Sixth Grade 7.24%
Seventh Grade 7.24%
Eighth Grade 6.58%
Ninth Grade 6.58%
Tenth Grade 7.24%
Eleventh Grade 9.87%
Twelfth Grade 9.21%

The study also sought to develop a sample of teachers that reflected all subject areas
taught in the school. Table 6 shows subject area representation. Self-contained (19%) represents
teachers in early childhood and elementary who teach general subjects in a self-contained format.
Aside from self-contained teachers, the subject area teachers most represented are Lenguaje
(Spanish Language Arts) teachers. The subject area least represented is Social Studies (1.12%).
That can be explained by the fact that the Social Studies department was in the midst of a year of
high turnover, and there were only three returning Social Studies teachers in the school at the
time of the study.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

87

Table 6
Subject Area Representation
Subject Area Currently
Teaching

Percentage of teachers
in the study representing
this subject area

Self-contained 19.10%
Math 8.99%
Language Arts 7.87%
Lenguaje 15.73%
Social Studies 1.12%
Estudios Sociales 6.74%
Technology 5.62%
Science 8.99%
Physical Education 6.74%
Applied Arts 8.99%
Learning Support Services 10.11%

The sample also included a stratified sampling of representation of both overseas and
locally-hired teachers. Of the 151 teachers who received the survey, 34% had an overseas-hire
contract while 66% had local contracts. Figure 3 shows the hiring classification breakdown of
those who responded to the survey, 31% overseas-hires and 69% local-hires, only slight variance
from the target population.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

88
Figure 3

Hiring Classification of Survey Respondents

While locally-hired teachers are the great majority of respondents, the gap closes in
regards to what language in which the teacher provides instruction. This result is likely because
many teachers hired locally are content area teachers (such as math or science) and teach in
English. As Figure 4 shows, the sample population is comprised of 42. 53% of teachers who
provide instruction in English and 57.47% who teach in Spanish.

Figure 4

Language of Instruction

57.47%
42.53%
Language Taught In
Español English
69.00%
31.00%
Hiring Classification of Survey Respondents
local overseas
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

89

Another important stratification was the classification of official teacher leadership at the
school. Figure 5 shows that 55% of teachers who responded to the survey currently serve in
teacher leadership positions at the school. These positions include content area curriculum
liaisons, grade level coordinators, professional learning community leaders, or instructional
coaches. Across the teacher population at school, approximately 35% of teachers engage in
leadership positions. The representation of teacher leaders in the study is therefore higher than
actual representation at the school. This may be due to the fact that 27% of the school population
was not surveyed (brand new teachers) and generally only returning teachers take on these
leadership roles.

Figure 5

Teacher Leader Representation

As previously stated, this study included only teachers who had worked full-time at the
school for at least one year. Table 7 outlines the number of years of teaching experience
represented in the sample population. The average number of total years teaching was 17. The
45%
55%
Not currently holding a leadership position in
the school
Currently holding a teacher leadership
position in the school
Current Leadership Capacity
of Survey Respondents
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

90
average number of years teaching at ISLA was nine, with a minimum number of one previous
year taught and a maximum of 35 years teaching. The range was quite wide with experience in
the school ranging from relatively new to the profession to veteran teachers.

Table 7
Number of Years Teaching Represented in Survey Population

Mean Median Mode
Standard
deviation Min Max Range

Total Years
as a
Full-time
Teacher
17

15

5

10.10

4

45

41

Total Years
Teaching
Full-time at
ISLA
9

6

2

8.76

1

35

34

Focus Group Participants
As described in Chapter Three, a total of 15 teachers participated in the focus groups. The
researcher randomly selected the focus group participants based on a sampling frame applying
section of the school, hiring classification, and teacher leadership criteria. One focus group was
comprised of randomly selected locally-hired teachers. One focus group was comprised of
randomly selected overseas-hired teachers. Another focus group was comprised of randomly
selected teacher leaders in the school. Each group’s random selection was stratified so there was
representation from all sections of the school. Figures 6 and 7 outline the total focus group
composition. Figure 6 shows representation by section of the school. Figure 7 shows focus group
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

91
composition by hiring classification (locally or overseas-hired) and the number of the total
participants who held teacher leadership positions in the school.

Figure 6
s
Focus Groups Total Composition by Section of the School

Figure 7

Focus Group Composition by Classification

Early Chilhood
27%
Elementary
20%
Middle School
20%
High School
33%
Focus Group Composition by Section of the School
8
7
8
Teacher Leaders Local Hire Overseas Hire
Focus Group Composition by Classification
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

92
Results and Findings
This section reports on the results of the survey and the findings of the focus groups as
they relate to the research questions. Thus, the results and findings are reported through the
distinct lenses of knowledge, motivation, and organization influences identified in the conceptual
framework and the literature. The chapter concludes with a discussion of these results and
findings as they interact and triangulate each other.
Research Question 1
What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs necessary for P-12
teachers to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices from the professional
development program in their daily activities?
Knowledge
Knowledge includes the distinct areas of factual and conceptual declarative knowledge,
procedural knowledge, and metacognitive knowledge (Krathwol, 2002). To increase
performance, gaps in these areas of knowledge influences must be identified and addressed
(Clark & Estes, 2008). This section discusses results from the survey and focus groups related to
declarative and conceptual knowledge about professional expectations and conceptual and
metacognitive knowledge in regards to student-centered learning.
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about professional expectations. Declarative
knowledge is discrete, learned content. Conceptual knowledge refers to more complex,
schematic content, which requires deeper understanding (Krathwol, 2002). To plan for the
professional development needs for student-centered learning at ISLA, one aspect important to
know and understand is how aware the teachers are of the expectations, both declarative and
conceptually, for what it means to be a student-centered learning professional at the school. This
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

93
knowledge must support teachers in organizing clear domains and cognitive schema of the
declarative and conceptual understanding of student-centered learning in a way that transfers to
their actual practice (Van Gerven, Paas, Van Merrienboer, & Schmidt, 2002). As shown in Table
8, the survey found that 96% of teachers report that they know what the professional
expectations are at the school. Only four percent of teachers either disagreed or strongly
disagreed and thus declared that they were not clear about the professional expectations. This
result indicates that teachers overwhelmingly feel confident in their own knowledge of
professional expectations. And while 84% of teachers report that they believe their colleagues
know what is expected of them, they appear to be 12% less confident in their colleagues than
themselves about these professional expectations. The next section further discusses the nuances
of this knowledge domain as explored with the focus groups.

Table 8
Teacher Reported Knowledge About Professional Expectations

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I know what is expected of me as a professional at our
school.
96%

My colleagues know what is expected of them as
professionals at our school.
84%

Subjective knowledge about expectations based on personal interpretation. The
focus groups validated this result about professional expectation. They also provided more
nuanced understanding of the result. All three focus groups seemed confident explaining
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

94
professional expectations in the school. They easily spoke about the expectation to contribute to
curriculum alignment at the school, that as teachers they should facilitate an environment that
engages students as active learners, and they should implement methodologies prioritized
through professional development offered at the school. All three groups were easily able to
quickly develop a list of expectations. The list included variations on teacher qualifications and
professionalism, understanding the mission of the school, specific skills such as technology
integration or leadership abilities, flexible thinking and working styles, and support for students
in various ways. Teachers eventually agreed that, while they felt they knew the expectations for
their work, they also were not able to speak to common and specific expectations that were
communicated by and from the school which applied P-12.
One teacher asked, “Have you seen a job description? I don’t know that I have. I just
don’t think I have.” This wondering sparked a conversation:
“There is a minimum job description on the website,” one teacher said. “It’s just very
broad and general.”
“Expectation is just such a broad term,” added another.
“I just don’t know what success looks like,” another teacher went on.
This conversation echoed across focus groups. “The expectations are unspoken. People
feel it because of what they observe happening around them,” said one teacher leader.
Another teacher talked about the previous development of ‘how we do business
documents,’ shared documents that have been collaboratively developed by the teaching faculty.
She said, “those more than anything have been helpful in deciding what is actually the
expectation.” The challenge inherent in these conversations was that teachers had developed
mental lists of what they expect of themselves, what they believe is the expectation of the school
and their principals, yet cannot identify or pinpoint what those explicit expectations are and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

95
where they might find them in writing. They also point to those expectations changing as faculty
change. With the reality of high turnover rates, that can make for inconsistent and changing
expectations or a teacher feeling empowered to “throw out” (as one teacher put it) the
expectations they do not feel like complying with rather than being held accountable for standard
professional expectations. Teachers know and understand expectations, yet those expectations
are subjective based on their personal experience in the school. This all said, some specific
themes around professional expectations that repeatedly arose throughout the discussion of
knowledge of professional expectations were the expectation to work as a team and to
differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all students. The following sections explore these
themes.
Expectation of team. Teachers understand they are expected to collaborate and work as
teams. They spoke about these expectations in both broad and specific terms.
“Collaboration is something that is very much expected,” said one teacher while others in
the focus group nodded in agreement.
“It is expected that there will be good teamwork,” said another. Consistently, the teachers
speak to the expectation of working together and do so widely and confidently.
One teacher clarified further by stating the expectation is about “knowing your students
well and talking to your colleagues about them” to best support the student’s growth holistically.
This idea echoed across the three focus groups. Teachers also speak about how they are working
as teams and the evolving nature of that teamwork:
“I think it’s very important to be very explicit about [the teamwork],” said one teacher.”
“We don’t have rules; we have agreements,” said another.
One teacher leader described the expectation of collaboration with colleagues:
“[Collaboration with my colleagues] means I am facilitating learning with a team… and also
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

96
[facilitating] how to work as a team.” She went on to say that there is some freedom in her team
facilitation. That freedom comes from the position of teacher leader, and the experience she
brings to the position. With that, another teacher leader added, there is an expectation that they
will bring to the team experience some level of innovation and new ideas that will support other
team members in their individual and collective growth. Teachers thus have a clear
understanding that to impact student learning they are expected to collaborate and take a team-
based approach to their work. In many cases, they understand and take steps towards
constructively and intentionally developing their teams.
Expectation of differentiation. Another theme that emerged in regards to professional
expectations was that of differentiation. Teachers understand that the school expects them to
meet the needs of all learners. Across all focus groups, participants spoke with confidence about
the expectation to differentiate. One teacher spoke about her classroom and that of her
colleagues:
It’s really about your focus on individual students, how much you know about them
personally, academically, and emotionally and how you are able to incorporate who they
are as people to both reach them and also to move them along or developmentally
progress. I see my classroom as more of a continuum towards standards or a continuum
towards achievement as opposed to just an evaluative process of whether or not you’re at
a specific standard. It’s more about how I can move every specific student along towards
a standard, as opposed to failing or passing them.
The teachers across focus groups overwhelmingly agreed with the sentiment about this
emphasis on the whole student. They also collectively lamented the difficulty, feasibility, and the
challenges they face in doing so. “Differentiation is more work-intensive,” said one. Another
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

97
teacher stated, “[differentiation] becomes very difficult when we’re looking at 110 students, one
teacher. No other support.”
“They expect us to work with children who have varying learning needs.”
“Yes,” another teacher added, “but we are not prepared to face and support all these
children in [referring to a student-centered approach] being ‘actors’ in their own education.”
Another teacher chimed in, “We are being asked to do more than the skills we have.”
This sentiment recurred across focus groups. One teacher leader said, “It’s an expectation
that you’re meeting the needs of all students and that can be very difficult.” The teachers are
clear about the declarative expectation of differentiation, and meeting the needs, of all learners,
but feel they have a gap in their conceptual (schematic) and procedural (how to) knowledge of
differentiation.
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about student-centered learning strategies. In
addition to knowing the expectations for being a student-centered learning professional at ISLA,
teachers must also know the differences between student-centered learning and teacher-centered
learning as well as know and incorporate strategies of true student-centered learning. As we
explore the declarative and conceptual knowledge about student-centered learning strategies at
the school, we first begin with how the teachers report their view of the environment itself and
whether or not they see it as a student-centered learning environment. The majority do. As Table
9 outlines, 78% of teachers reported that they would describe ISLA as a student-centered
learning environment. Even more than that, 88% of them report that they know strategies
associated with student-centered learning and 87% say they incorporate them into their teaching.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

98
Table 9
Teacher Reported Assessment of ISLA as Student-centered Learning Environment

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I would describe our school as a student-centered learning
environment.
78%

I know strategies associated with student-centered learning.

88%

I incorporate strategies with student-centered learning into
my teaching day.

87%

Qualitatively, mirroring the exploration of professional expectations, teachers confidently
reported wide understanding of the elements of student-centered learning, yet were not able to
articulate a clear and common school-wide conceptual understanding of student-centered
learning. They agreed in all focus groups that student-centered learning “has a lot of different
meanings” and “can be interpreted in many different ways.” Some clear themes emerged as what
those different meanings and interpretations are among the teachers. The themes included clear
perceptions of both teacher role and student role.
Teacher role in student-centered learning. Teachers in the focus groups reported widely
about their understanding of the role of the teacher in a student-centered learning environment.
How teachers design and deliver lessons, and set and implement their routines were all part of
the understanding of the teacher role in a student-centered learning environment. The focus
groups echoed the ideas that the teacher in a student-centered learning environment is a
“thoughtful” and “deliberate” planner with the students’ needs in mind. “It is about being
flexible,” said one teacher. “You can observe [student-centeredness] a lot in teacher planning and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

99
the way [the teachers] are collaborating,” said another. As with professional expectations, this
collaboration with colleagues to design student-centered lessons and routines seemed to be an
element of the understanding of student-centeredness. That said, teachers also individualized the
role. One teacher said, student-centered learning “is me designing opportunities for learning for
students. He or she who does the talking, does the learning. For me, it’s not a lecture platform.”
This teacher saw his role in the classroom as shifting from “deliverer of knowledge” to a
“designer of opportunities” for the students to build their own knowledge. Another teacher added
that student-centered learning is “about your teacher being there to support you to follow your
instinct to learn.” The teachers spoke to how, and the degree to which, teachers in a student-
centered learning environment provide opportunity for students to explore their interests. “Do a
project on [a topic that interests you] and have the mentality of mistakes are okay. It’s my role to
provide you that space,” said one teacher. “That’s growing,” added another.
The interaction between teacher and student punctuated this conversation about teacher
role in student-centered learning. “It’s not about the teacher; it’s about how much the students
are engaged. By how students are participating, and the conversations that are happening.” While
local teachers spoke about the environment being an “active place of learning,” the overseas-
hired teachers stood out as being focused on the teacher really understanding and knowing
various student needs “on a continuum.” Student-centered learning “is developmentally
appropriate” said one teacher. Much like this understanding of a continuum, another teacher
described his understanding of his role as “moving [students] towards engagement.” A teacher
leader said it was less about what the teacher is doing than what the student is doing. She said,
“You can tell if [the learning environment] is student-centered by how much the students are
engaged.”
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

100
Teachers in all three focus groups spoke of this idea of the teacher role as a support
structure rather than, as the adage one teacher quoted says, “the sage on the stage.” This idea was
echoed across the groups in multiple ways. “Teachers facilitate student learning,” one said, and
“must support students,” said another. As one teacher declared, it is “how we value student
achievement” and meet the students where they are. “We are not the main important thing in the
classroom,” said one local teacher. This understanding of the role of the teacher in student-
centered learning environments illustrates the notion that the student is indeed at the center of the
learning. Teachers see themselves as the one who supports and guides that learning. While
teachers see their students as the “main thing” in the classroom, they also see themselves as the
main designers of the tasks their students engage in. “There is also a continuum of what student-
centered learning is,” pointed out one teacher. More clearly defined expectations about where the
school wants to be on that continuum will support teachers in not having to guess or define for
themselves what their important role is in the process.
While other elements of teacher role surfaced in other aspects of the focus group
conversations, two vital components of student-centered learning reflected in the literature that
did not come up in the conversation about teacher role in student-centered learning were that of
teacher reflection or goal setting. These are both discussed later in the chapter, yet it is noticeable
that they did not emerge in the discussion of the teacher role in student-centered learning.
Additionally, only the teacher leaders brought up the need for teachers to use data for their
practice to be student-centered. Although all groups spoke to levels of engagement, and making
“human connection,” knowing and focusing on the individual students “personally,
academically, and emotionally,” or “being conscious of the student,” only the locally-hired
teachers specifically spoke of enjoying time with their students or other elements of having fun
(such as smiling, laughing, etc.) or personally engaging with their students in a joyful way.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

101
Student role in student-centered learning. While the teachers focused on their role as
teachers in a student-centered learning environment, they also spoke about their understanding of
what the students are (or should be) doing in a student-centered environment. Students engaging
in “active learning” was a common thread of vocabulary used by all groups. When probing that
idea, asking teachers to explain what that means and how it manifests in their classroom, student
choice certainly arose as a common understanding of student-centered learning.
Student choice and how that manifests in the classroom was explained in various ways.
One teacher explained, “Students have the opportunity to grapple with content… where they
have a chance to build knowledge for themselves.” This idea seemed to resonate through all
focus groups and was also validated when triangulating with the survey results about
environment below. One local teacher said students are “the ones in charge of investigating,
processing, and sharing.” “Students need to be the actors of their own learning,” said another
local teacher. “And ask lots of questions,” she continued. “Students picking the topics of things
they want to study. That’s a great example of student-centered learning,” said one overseas-hired
teacher. Another offered, “It means write about what you want to write about. Read the books
you are interested in.” This belief about the importance of student direction in their own learning
and student-generated questioning was validated in the survey results in Table 7, discussed
below.
While teachers articulated the importance of student-driven opportunities for student
engagement and overwhelmingly reported that they incorporate known student-centered learning
strategies into their daily activities, Estes (2004) reminds us that there are often inconsistencies
between these espoused values and actual practice. Turning to the quantitative data, which
explored a variety of student-centered versus teacher-centered beliefs and strategies, we see
Estes’ assertion of discrepancies and contradictions confirmed in relation to ISLA and teacher
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

102
espoused beliefs and practices. Table 10 below reports some of the various inconsistencies in
these beliefs. The table shows three separate survey items for identified student-centered
strategies and teacher-centered beliefs and the total percentage of teachers who agree or strongly
agree with that belief. ISLA teachers overwhelmingly agree or strongly agree about the
importance of students being self-directed (90%) and asking open-ended questions (99%). Many
of them also feel that teachers need to both generate the questions for students (60%) and know
the answers to the questions (49%). While these responses are not exact opposites of each other,
they do indicate some contradictions in belief systems about the use of questions and who should
guide learning in the classroom.

Table 10
Teacher Reported Knowledge About Teacher-centered vs. Student-centered Learning Belief
Statements

Teacher-centered
Survey Item

Total
Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or
Strongly Agree

Student-centered
Survey Item

Total
Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or
Strongly Agree

Teachers need to know
the answers to questions
they pose in the
classroom.
49%

Students need to have
opportunities to be
self-directed.

90%

Teachers need to come
up with the questions
that guide student
learning.

60%

Encouraging students
to ask open-ended
questions is important.
99%

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

103
This instance was the first time there were clear differences that stood out when
disaggregating the data. Disaggregating this data by subject area, it is interesting to note that the
Learning Support and Spanish language teachers stand out as the subgroups that most agree with
teacher-centered learning beliefs. Otherwise, there are no other specific subject areas that appear
to have commonly held teacher-centered beliefs. That said, when disaggregating by hiring
classification, either local or overseas, the differences stand out more clearly. Table 11 shows
how teacher beliefs differ by hiring classification.

Table 11
Teacher Reported Knowledge About Teacher-centered Learning Belief Statements
Disaggregated by Hiring Classification

Teacher-centered
Survey Item

Total
Percentage of Locally-
hired Teachers who
Agree or
Strongly Agree

Total
Percentage of Overseas-
hired Teachers who
Agree or
Strongly Agree

Teachers need to know
the answers to questions
they pose in the
classroom.

62%

29%

Teachers need to come
up with the questions
that guide student
learning.

76%

33%

In contrast to these inconsistent results about beliefs about strategies in the classroom,
there were consistencies in reported beliefs about what students need in their environment. As
shown in Table 12, ISLA teachers overwhelmingly reported that they prioritize student
collaborations (92%), student reflection (99%), and students being able to learn at their own pace
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

104
(89%). Additionally, only 15% of teachers reported that a quiet classroom is most conducive to
learning, which may indicate that most teachers place value on an active space that encourages
student interaction as also indicated and validated above with the focus groups.

Table 12
Teacher Reported Knowledge About What Students Need in their Environment

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

Providing time for students to work together is a priority for
me.
92%

Students should reflect on their learning. 99%

Students should be able to learn at their own pace.
89%

My students need a quiet classroom to learn best.
15%

In relation to other strategies associated with student-centered learning, the survey
explored practices about assessment and goal setting. Table 13 reports these results, showing that
27% of teachers report quizzes and tests as their primary forms of assessment, 42% of students
setting their own goals, and 57% of students evaluating their own work.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

105
Table 13
Teacher Reported Knowledge About Student Assessment and Goal Setting

Survey Item
Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I mostly assess my students using quizzes and tests.
27%

My students set their own goals.

42%

My students evaluate their own work.

57%

While teachers are able to easily speak about what student-centered learning means to
them personally, they are not able to talk about what it means to the school. “There has not been
a very clear definition of what the school sees as student-centered learning,” said one teacher
finally, to peer agreement. Another teacher said that he can and does create such an environment,
but “student-centered learning was not one of the priorities that I felt got pushed to me” in the
hiring process. “It’s not been one of the things I necessarily felt directed to do.” Teachers feel
they don’t have clear understanding or communication about this concept as a focused and well-
articulated goal of the school.
The teachers also reported that their understanding of student-centered learning posed its
challenges with facilitation. “The process is messy,” said a teacher leader. Another overseas-
hired teacher offered an additional voice of worry and wonderment, “I struggle with the idea that
while I am setting them up for success by letting them choose their learning and telling them it is
okay if they fail, we’re all going to keep growing together, there is still this college cloud
looming… and if you end up with a 60 then, it’s actually terrible. I just don’t know if it is
helpful.” Other focus group participants nodded in agreement. So, while 89% of teachers feel (as
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

106
reported in Table 12) that students should be able to learn at their own pace, they also struggle
with how they can “push students” and “have rigor with learning” when students guide their own
learning. This internal tug-of-war with teacher philosophies about what they believe to be both
true and right from the student experience perspective appears to be in contrast with what they
believe to be both true and right from a career and college preparation perspective. This polarity
in understandings makes the reported inconsistencies outlined above make more sense. This
internal struggle they feel also points to gaps in their declarative and conceptual knowledge
about how the elements of student-centered learning can support deeper learning, greater
understanding and synthesis of content, and increased achievement.
Student collaboration. One final concept or “strategy” of student-centered learning that
resounded across all focus groups, was the idea of student collaborations. “You need to have a
dynamic classroom of collaboration,” said one teacher. “Students work together on projects they
choose,” said another. This concept is also triangulated with the survey results above. Teachers
have an understanding about student collaboration as a key component of a student-centered
learning environment. They have understood that this is an expectation of the school, for all
students to engage in collaborative work in every class, and articulate why they think it is an
important experience for students. “As we become more globalized,” said one local teacher,
“working collaboratively helps us learn from the skills of others… students are not merely
repeaters of knowledge, but they need to propose, discuss, and reach agreements as a team.”
They also pushed back on this idea. One teacher said, “It’s okay to learn to work in teams, but
students also [need to] work as individuals in that group. They should develop their work as an
individual and then bring it to the team. Bring their strength to the team.” Another teacher
agreed, saying,
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

107
If we are just the facilitators of collaborative work, we are failing 50% of our students
because people in the work place are still individuals. They need to provide their own
skills, their own learning, their own abilities, and learn how to bridge those abilities with
the ones the others bring. If we facilitate only collaborative [skills] it is the thing that gets
in the way of a lot of our students’ learning and engagement. They think that being
collaborative is we all do the same thing; you do what I do. So they just sit down [with
their group], and that’s it. Quit working. Let somebody else do it.
These teachers believe that this collaborative work among students is an expectation of
the school. They understand that working as a team (as they do in their own work) is important
for preparing their students for a competitive, global workforce, yet they also see it is as a barrier
to some students’ learning. They, therefore, may have a gap in declarative knowledge, perhaps
because the school needs to be more precise about the expectation, as well as a gap in conceptual
and procedural knowledge in relation to a deep schematic understanding of developing high
functioning teams.
Metacognitive knowledge. Metacognitive knowledge refers to knowledge about one’s
thinking, thinking processes, and one’s own regulation of thinking (Seli, n.d.). Teachers need to
be able to metacognitively reflect on whether their teaching is student-centered or teacher-
centered, what they do and do not know about student-centered learning, how that knowledge
and awareness affects their work, and how they can grow further as a professional. Creating
opportunity and setting the stage for this kind of thinking allows teachers to meaningfully
connect theory and practice (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006) and makes it more likely those
connections will transfer into daily practice (Baker, 2006; Mayer, 2011; Seli, n.d.).
This section reviews the survey results and focus group findings related to teacher
reported metacognition. Table 14 outlines these results. To begin exploring metacognition, the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

108
survey asked teachers to report about their own awareness of the impact of their well-being on
their effectiveness as a teacher. Ninety-five percent of the teachers reported that they do know
this impact. Additionally, 93% of teachers go on to report that they are aware of the elements of
their state of mind when they are engaged in teaching as well as the areas where they are thriving
as a teacher. Ninety-one percent reported that they know how to regulate their emotional states.
These elements would indicate that teachers are engaging in metacognitive reflection about their
practice. However, the number of teachers who report regular reflection on the elements of
teaching practice shows a decrease to 78%. This is still a majority of teachers reporting
reflecting, yet shows somewhat of a discrepancy from teachers who report awareness of the state
of mind and areas where they thrive. Furthermore, while 78% of teachers report they themselves
are reflecting deeply on their practice, the number continues to decrease when teachers are asked
to report about the practices of their teams. Fifty-four percent of teachers reported that their
teams engage in deep reflection on the elements of their collective practice.

Table 14
Teacher Reported Metacognitive Awareness and Practice

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I know the impact of my well-being on my effectiveness as
a teacher.

95%

I am aware of the elements of my state of mind (i.e. mood
or mental state) when I am deeply engaged in my teaching.

93%

I know how to regulate my emotional states.

91%

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

109
I am aware of the areas in my teaching where I am thriving.

93%

I regularly engage in deep reflection on the elements of my
teaching practice.

78%

My team regularly engages in deep reflection on the
elements of our collective practices.

54%

In addition to knowing and incorporating student-centered learning strategies into daily
activities, another important part of metacognition related to student-centered learning is the
ability to recognize and reflect on and see these practices in other areas, that is to be able to
identify models of student-centered learning across the whole school. Table 15 shows this
teacher-reported identification of models of student-centered learning. Teachers report less
ability to identify models across their grade level (67%), section (76%), and the entire school
(44%) than their reporting of incorporation of the strategies into their own classrooms.
Additionally, only 43% of teachers report that there is someone in their network of support that
assists in the identification of the incorporation of these strategies into their teaching.

Table 15
Teacher Reported Identification of Student-centered Learning Models at ISLA

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I can identify many models of student-centered learning
across my grade level.

67%

I can identify many models of student-centered learning
across my section.

76%

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

110
I can identify many models of student-centered learning
across the entire school, P-12.

44%

Someone in my network of support helps me identify where
I am implementing student-centered learning practices vs.
teacher-centered learning practices.

43%

Teachers in the focus groups spoke especially to the last point here from the survey, that
is their “network of support” helping them to metacognitively reflect on their practices. Many
teachers were able to identify by name the support network of colleagues and specific roles in the
school who help them identify when they are implementing student-centered or teacher-centered
practices at the school. They hold these individuals in high regard. This topic was also a source
of alternative and nuanced perspectives among the focus groups. Teachers across the groups
said, “We trust that it is going to be okay if we go to [our support systems], they “will help you
move in the right direction,” and “I feel comfortable opening up both personally and
professionally.” To nonverbal agreement, another acknowledged, “There are lots of opportunities
if you are looking.” Others continued, “It’s only if you’re interested in going there” or
specifically ask for the support. “I have to advocate for myself” to get the support, said another
teacher. “You have to motivate it and you have to be the impetus,” said another.
As the survey reported (43%), and validated in these focus groups, teachers seem divided
on whether or not they feel they have a network of support. Those that do, feel they do
passionately. Those that don’t also feel so passionately. Commonly, they agree that it is
dependent on building relationships and trust to be able to ask and receive the feedback and
support. Ultimately, teachers feel they have support in various corners of the school, yet they feel
that support has not been institutionalized. They need to ask for the support rather than the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

111
school anticipating instructional needs and providing it as a matter of operations. The next
section about motivation further discusses these elements.
Motivation
Motivation refers to two distinct aspects: 1) taking initiative; and 2) maintaining
consistent behavior towards a goal (Mayer, 2011). Motivation is defined by three elements: that
the learner chooses to engage in the activity; is persistent in working towards the goal; and puts
mental effort into the task (Clark & Estes, 2008). When these elements of motivation combine
with the knowledge factors, there is increased performance (Clark & Estes, 2008). This section
will review the survey results that focused on motivation influences related to ISLA teaching
faculty achieving the goal to implement learning from the student-centered learning professional
development program in their daily activities.
Utility value and student-centered learning communication. According to Expectancy
Value theory, perceiving that a task is useful greatly influences the ability to achieve a goal. This
perceived usefulness is called Utility Value (Eccles, 2006). Teachers must believe that the time
and energy they put towards creating a student-centered learning environment is worthwhile
(Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik, Guzdial, & Palincsar, 1991). Therefore, it is important to
note up front the collective belief about the importance of collective or team communication
about student-centered learning at the school. Table 16 shows that 100% of teachers reported that
they believe this communication on a team level is important. Additionally, 96% of teachers
report that communication across the whole community is also important.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

112
Table 16
Teacher Reported Beliefs about Collective Communication

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I think team communication about student-centered learning
is important.

100%

I think it is important for teachers across our community to
connect with each other in different ways.

96%

This concept of team communication, also discussed above in relation to knowledge
about professional expectations, serves as a motivating factor for teachers. Teachers see
communication as vital to their position and ability to impact student learning and speak about it
in a variety of ways. “Working as a team elevates lesson planning and design,” said one teacher.
Another teacher remarked about this collaboration, “knowing your students well and talking to
your colleagues about them” supports the teacher in meeting each student’s needs. She spoke to
how this process of communication helps the teacher understand the many and varied aspects of
how a teacher can support individual growth for students, which in turn makes the teaching and
learning practices more student-centered.
Another focus group member pointed out that it is important to communicate for another
reason. He pointed out that this communication about student-centered learning practices also
supports “keeping the team on the same page.” Another pointed out that, as a team, teachers
“need to believe that a particular strategy actually is best practice” and the constant and open
communication supports the continued team refinement of those beliefs about practice. “We
have to have a structure for shared dialogue to impact student learning,” another teacher offered.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

113
As in the survey, there were no dissenting voices about this concept among all 15 focus group
members. In sum, teachers have clear utility value for communication about student-centered
teaching and learning practices.
Collective self-efficacy. As we consider this communication and connection across the
school, a factor of motivation important to review from the survey and focus groups is that of
efficacy. Self-efficacy theory tells us that motivation increases when belief in one’s own ability
to successfully accomplish a task, or efficacy, is high (Pajares, 2006). Teachers across the focus
groups reported feeling confident in their own abilities to implement student-centered learning,
yet as explored in the knowledge domain, feel they need clearer understanding of processes and
expectations for them to do so. The teachers in this setting also, as confirmed in the knowledge
domain discussion of expectations about them, give weight to their collective work. Collective
self-efficacy is the belief and confidence that one’s group, team, or collective community can
together achieve their goal (Hirabayashi, n.d). Schools that make this collective efficacy a
priority have been found to have teachers who exhibit deeper engagement with their teaching
craft (Moller, Stearns, Mickelson, Bottia, & Banerjee, 2014; Stearns, Banerjee, Moller, &
Mickelson, 2015).
When teachers perceive that their collective work is valued, their engagement increases
(Moller et al., 2014). As Table 17 shows, 91% of teachers report that they believe teacher
collaborations are valued at the school. Teachers must also feel they are part of active
collaborations within a robust professional community where their successes are articulated and
celebrated (Stearns, Banerjee, Moller, & Mickelson, 2015). Again, 91% of teachers reported they
are part of such a robust professional learning community. While 81% of them report that they
talk about (articulate) these successes with one another, only 66% of teachers report that they
celebrate or come together to honor these successes.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

114

Table 17
Teacher Reported Beliefs about Collective Efficacy

Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

Teacher collaborations are valued at our school.

91%

I am a member of a strong professional community.

91%

I am part of a collective culture where teachers work
together to articulate (talk about) successes.

81%

I am part of a collective culture where teachers work
together to celebrate (be honored for or come together to
commemorate or praise) successes.

66%

Trust is also an important topic in the literature regarding building teams and collective
efficacy. Teachers must develop trust in their colleagues to be most effective. Trust can thrive in
a school environment through specific actions by team members (Garmston & Wellman, 2016).
Figure 8 shows the degree to which teachers report their perceptions of their trust in their
colleagues and their colleagues trusting them. Ninety-five percent of teachers report that their
colleagues trust them, and 92% feel they trust their colleagues.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

115
Figure 8

Teacher and Colleague Trust

Further, an important element for the development of trust focuses on relationships.
Relationships within the structure of schools influence the school’s overall health. As shown in
Table 18, 89% of teachers reported that they believe their work relationships support ongoing
learning and active engagement with their teaching craft. This result indicates that teachers place
value on their developed relationships and how those relationships contribute to the development
of their teaching practice. These results about trust and relationships validated the previous
findings in the knowledge discussion. Many teachers indeed have developed trust in their
colleagues, their teams, and their support networks at the school.
Table 18
Teacher Reported Beliefs about Their Work Relationships

Survey Item

Total Percentage of Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

My work relationships support ongoing learning and
active engagement with my teaching craft.
89%

92%
95%
I trust my colleagues.
My colleagues trust me.
Teacher-Colleague Trust
Total Teachers who Agree or Strongly Agree
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

116

Intrinsic value. Intrinsic value refers to the enjoyment one experiences during the
process of task accomplishment (Eccles, 2006). In the process of their daily work (and related
“tasks”), teachers must feel engaged and find personal and internal joy for that work to be truly
meaningful and transfer to their students. This intrinsic motivation is a central factor concerning
teachers (Belle, 2009).
When exploring motivation qualitatively, intrinsic motivation surfaced as a dominating
factor for many teachers across the focus groups. One teacher began, “A lot of that intrinsic
motivation comes from design. When, as a teacher designer, you design a unit that is out of your
comfort zone and has some risk to it, then you’re going to be on top of the world.” Another
agreed, speaking about the growth and inspiration that happens personally for him when he can
experiment and make choices about what might support his students “moving from here to here”
with their learning.
The two other teacher focus groups confirmed their belief that teachers are naturally
intrinsically motivated, and that also applies to themselves and their colleagues. “It drives us,”
one teacher leader said. Another teacher leader added, “It’s because I feel responsible for the
education we need to provide those kids.” A teacher in another focus group added, “You’re just
intrinsically motivated to improve your classroom, and a lot of that comes from having choice.”
In some respects, she felt, that to continue to support intrinsic motivation required the same
mindset we have about meeting the unique needs of students. Differentiation should also apply to
teachers. “We’re all going to be intrinsically motivated about different things,” she concluded.
Intrinsic “wholeheartedness,” a genuine engagement in the craft of teaching is required
for the teacher to be successful (Rodgers, 2002). Teachers at ISLA do experience this aspect of
expectancy value, intrinsic value. They also feel that this intrinsic value can be tentative and
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

117
must continue to be nurtured for them to continue to grow and stay engaged with their work and
students.
Extrinsic value. While intrinsic motivation is found to be a sustainable motivator,
aspects of motivation not to be overlooked and duly related to relationships, discussed above, are
acknowledgment and encouragement. This theme emerged in the survey and the focus groups in
different ways. Table 19 outlines the survey results of teacher reported perceptions of
acknowledgment and encouragement in relation to leadership, their colleagues, and other
encouragement outside of their teams. The survey found that only two-thirds of teachers, 66%,
who engaged in leadership opportunities felt that they received recognition for doing so. Eighty-
one percent of the teachers felt encouraged and empowered to model engagement for their
students. Again, when related to their colleagues, the numbers increase. Teachers reported that
89% of them feel their colleagues appreciate them and 87% say those colleagues show that
appreciation regularly.

Table 19
Teacher Reported Acknowledgments and Encouragement

Survey Item

Total Percentage of Teachers
who
Agree or Strongly Agree
I have received recognition when I engage in leadership
opportunities.
66%

I am encouraged and empowered to model engagement
for my students.
81%

I feel encouraged by someone in our school to develop
my content expertise. 77%
My colleagues appreciate me.

89%
My colleagues regularly show their appreciation of me.
87%
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

118

When it came to the focus groups, the teachers spoke about what other factors motivate
them. We can divide these factors into the following two themes: outside recognition and student
application.
Outside recognition or acknowledgments. While teachers often feel driven by the feeling
of being motivated from within (as evidenced above in the intrinsic motivation section), and not
relying on outside recognition, one teacher leader shone a light on this as a perceived myth. She
said, “I actually find it really rewarding when my boss or someone recognizes something
interesting that they’ve seen… It just feels good to hear that from someone.” Another teacher
said, “It’s my belief that the best teachers are intrinsically motivated, but a verbal compliment
does go a long way with teachers.” “I agree,” said another, “it’s just important to say ‘Hey, what
a great job you did today.” Teacher leaders also felt motivated by their colleagues noticing their
work and contributions and by hearing feedback from the teachers they have worked with.
“When a teacher comes back and says, ‘I used what you suggested and it went great,’ this kind of
thing is motivating.” Knowing that her suggestion resulted in classroom success made her want
to suggest strategies to more teachers.
Others spoke of this recognition also coming from outside of the classroom and the
parent community. “It is important to me that parents are happy with their children’s education
and that I have played a role in their child’s success,” said one teacher. “I like to know that
parents recognize my efforts with their child,” said another. The teachers know they are crucial
contributors to students’ successes; they also appreciate when the other key contributors in
student growth (most specifically parents) also acknowledge it.
While teachers do want outside recognition, they also felt that acknowledgment meant
something much more than just standard recognition. They recognize that external recognitions
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

119
are not the core of their motivation, but they are an aspect of it. “Most of all,” one teacher
explained, “you just want to be treated like a professional. I want to be acknowledged insofar as
that you believe in my ability to push myself to be self-motivated, that I don’t have to have my
hand held to do certain things.” This recognition for teachers also speaks to efficacy, as
discussed earlier. When teachers feel others believe in them, they have an increase in their own
efficacy too.
Student application. Teachers in the focus group also put students at the center of what
motivates them. Many teachers often talk about “lightbulb moments” with students. In many
ways, the phrase has become cliché in teaching circles, yet it is still often used to describe a
student finally “getting it.” The focus group teachers spoke to when students “get it” as a key
motivational factor for them, but they also took that understanding further. To them, the real
motivation is not only when students “get it” but rather when they are able to apply what “they
got” about the concept or learning to a new situation. “When they can apply [the learning] to
something that’s going on currently, that has relevance, that’s where there is meaning.” Another
teacher spoke of this as well, “Watching kids be successful is in itself an innate reward that
propels us forward in ways that other things don’t.”
Organization
Organizational culture is the overarching idea that encompasses the general beliefs and
ways of thinking within the organization (Schein, 2004). As we place organizational cultural in
dialogue with knowledge and motivation, and address them simultaneously, change efforts are
more successful (Clark and Estes, 2008). Researchers suggest that flexible organizational
cultures are better poised for long-term success in our changing world (Scharmer, 2007; Schein,
2004; Senge, 1990). This culture, known as a “learning culture,” must be shared by all members
of the organization and evolve over time (Senge, 2014). With a shared grounding culture, the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

120
underlying beliefs and values, or cultural models, shift from their perception as barriers to being
seen as opportunities for growth. This section reports the results of two cultural models
impacting teacher goal achievement at the school, organizational identity and continuity and
conflict. This section also reports on the results related to cultural settings (how the models
manifest visibly).
Organizational identity and continuity. Collective organizational identity connects and
strengthens a community and improves actual and perceived work (Bolman & Deal, 2013). To
maximize engagement and effectiveness, employees need to feel drawn and aligned with a
common purpose throughout the entire organization (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Connected to the
previous section on Motivation, when there is perceived collective efficacy, there is greater
commitment to organizational mission (Bandura, 2000). Teachers need to see themselves as part
of a collective experience where teachers work together to facilitate work towards a common and
shared vision. Figure 9 shows that 76% of teachers report feeling connected to a common P-12
purpose at the school and 91% feel they engage with their colleagues around a shared vision for
student learning. This result indicates that colleague engagement at the school is more focused
on vision than the way individuals access and connect with common purpose.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

121
Figure 9
Teacher Engagement with Shared Vision

Conflict and creative friction. Garmston and Wellman (2016) remind us that as teachers
make these visible shifts from silo-ed work, where their work has traditionally been sequestered
away, to more collaborative and continuous across their complex systems, it is vital to encourage
the engagement of healthy conflict to work through various perspectives. Communities that dare
to do so are more conducive to growing and achieving their goals (Garmston & Wellman, 2016;
Senge, 2014). To begin, we look simply at the feelings around teacher comfortability with
conflict. As shown in Figure 10, 28% of teachers report that they either strongly disagree or
disagree with the statement that conflict is uncomfortable for them (indicating that they are
comfortable with conflict). On the opposite end of the spectrum, 39% of teachers report that they
strongly agree or agree with the statement that conflict is uncomfortable for them. These results
show the faculty as wholly divided in regards to this concept that is vital to organizational
growth.

91%
76%
I engage with my colleagues around a
shared vision for student learning.
I feel connected to a common P-12
purpose at the school.
Teachers Engagement with a Shared Vision
Total Teachers who Agree or Strongly Agree
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

122
Figure 10

Teacher Reported Feelings About Conflict

This was one of the few instances when there were interesting results when
disaggregating the data. Disaggregated by hiring classification, as shown in Figure 11, we see
that the feelings about conflict are generally distributed regardless of whether the teacher is
classified as locally or overseas-hired. The only significant difference seems to be that the
overseas-hire group did not strongly disagree nor strongly agree.

8%
20%
33% 33%
6%
Strongly
Disaagree
Disagree Neutral (Neither
Agree not
Disagree)
Agree Strongly Agree
Conflict is uncomfortable for me.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

123

This result becomes significant when triangulated with focus group findings, which
uncovered inconsistencies in the responses about conflict when this topic arose in the focus
groups. The perception from the overseas-hired teachers was that the local teachers were not
empowered to disagree with colleagues. “The local teachers need to be more empowered to have
conversations like this,” said one overseas-hired teacher. “We need to empower local staff… it’s
cultural for them not to confront,” said another. Yet, on the contrary, the locally-hired teachers
reported, “When there is opportunity to see and confront our differences, understanding is built.”
Both groups reported that they appreciated diverse perspectives. So, it seems there is more of a
gap in perception of each other’s feelings about conflict than an actual difference in those
feelings.
Table 20 outlines this idea further through the results related to survey items specific to
conflict with colleagues and peers. When having conversations with colleagues about something
they disagree about, 73% state that they feel comfortable. Likewise, 76% feel comfortable
8%
13%
22%
19%
6%
0%
8%
11%
14%
0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral (Neither
Agree or
Disagree)
Agree Strongly Agree
Conflict is uncomfortable for me.
(disaggregated by hiring classification)
local overseas
Figure 11
Feelings about Conflict disaggregated by Hiring Classification
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

124
presenting an idea that is contrary to what colleagues are saying. Only 61% said they feel
comfortable disagreeing with their peers. When it comes to presenting unique ideas (which
require a degree of individual risk) or displaying vulnerability (admitting they don’t know or
understand) teachers report even greater comfortability. Eighty-six percent state they feel
comfortable bringing new ideas to their team different than anything that has been done in the
past. Similarly, 83% feel comfortable displaying vulnerability, admitting to colleagues/peers that
they don’t know or understand something.

Table 20
Teacher Reported Feelings about Specific Elements of Perceived Conflict with Colleagues
Survey Item

Total Percentage of
Teachers who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I feel comfortable having a conversation with my
colleagues when we are talking about something we
might disagree.
73%

I feel comfortable presenting an idea contrary to what
my colleagues are saying.
76%
I feel comfortable disagreeing with a peer. 61%
I feel comfortable bringing a new idea to my team that is
different than anything we have done in the past.
86%
I feel comfortable telling my colleagues I don’t know or
understand something.
83%

This degree of comfortability with peers/colleagues does not necessarily to transfer to
comfortability with administrators. Table 21 and Figures 12, 13, and 14 outline these feelings
about conflict with administrators. As Figure 12 shows, the distribution of comfortability with
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

125
disagreement with an administrator mirrors the distribution of overall feelings about conflict as
shown previously in Figure 11. As Figures 12 and 13 below show, and similar to teachers’
feelings about presenting unique ideas (which require a degree of individual risk) or displaying
vulnerability (admitting they don’t know or understand), teachers report similar increased
comfortability with these ideas in regards to administrators.
The focus groups validated this result of some teachers having comfortability with
administrators and others not. For every teacher that brought up feelings of trust and
comfortability with their administrators, there was also a teacher that offered a counter point of
view or example of discomfort. “I don’t feel comfortable [bringing ideas] to my administrator,”
said one, while another countered, “I definitely trust my administrator.” However, it is also worth
noting that focus groups teachers expressed similar inconsistencies about comfort with
instructional coaches. One teacher offered her perspective on this issue that seemed to perplex
group members, “We have to be reminded that it is not an analysis of your job. They want to
help.” This vulnerability, to allow an administrator (or in this case anyone perceived as holding a
position of power in the institution) is something that is seen from multiple perspectives on the
campus. Some teachers welcome this level of creative friction and see it as a source of personal
growth as a teacher; others have discomfort or even fear related to it.

Table 21
Teacher Reported Feelings about Specific Elements of Perceived Conflict with Administrators
Survey Item
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree

Neutral

Agree
Strongly
Agree
I feel comfortable disagreeing
with an administrator.
10% 26% 29% 27% 8%
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

126

I feel comfortable bringing a
new idea to my administrator
that is different than anything
we have done in the past.

3% 6% 22% 48% 22%

I feel comfortable telling my
administrator that I don’t know
or understand something.

6% 14% 13% 43% 24%

Figure 12
Teacher Reported Feelings About Disagreeing with an Administrator

10%
26%
29%
27%
8%
Strongly
Disaagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
I feel comfortable disagreeing with an
administrator.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

127
Figure 13
Teacher Reported Feelings About Bringing New Ideas to an Administrator

Figure 14
Teacher Reported Feelings About Telling an Administrator They Don’t Know or Understand
Something

Teacher perceptions about time. Although not as widely studied as other resources,
time is a resource that schools must address and intentionally allocate as an essential resource for
3%
6%
22%
48%
22%
Strongly
Disaagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
I feel comfortable bringing a new idea to my
administrator that is different than anything we
have done in the past.
6%
14%
13%
43%
24%
Strongly
Disaagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
I feel comfortable telling my administrator I don’t
know or understand something.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

128
implementation of a professional development program to be successful and impact student
learning (Archibald, Coggshall, Croft, & Goe, 2011). Ultimately, a professional development
program must align with goals of the institution and bring teachers together to collaborate. Table
22 reports how the teachers at ISLA perceive time.
Regarding teacher perceptions about time, teachers overwhelmingly report that they do
not have enough of it. Only 10% of ISLA teachers feel they have enough time to work across
sections and get to know what is going on across the other sections in the school. Likewise, only
13% report they have enough time to work across grade levels, and 17% have enough time to
work cross circularly. In other areas related to time, such as having enough time to teach the
intended curriculum, work with their students, team, and administrator, or take care of extra
responsibilities or have time to explore other areas of interest, there was a range 40-60% of
teachers who felt they had time to do so. This result translates to about half of the teachers
feeling they do have enough time in their day and the other feeling they don’t. This divide was
evident in the quantitative data.
Triangulating feelings about time with qualitative data, all of the 15 teachers in the focus
groups agreed that time was an issue in one way or another. Early childhood and elementary
teachers spoke to the need to have more individual planning time and lamented not having some
freedom to “go on your own” in relation to some of their planning since a goal at all levels has so
heavily focused on school alignment. “We’re a team moving together,” one commented, but it is
hard to get on the same page because we get sidetracked because “we are juggling all these
things at once.” Only one teacher offered a difference of opinion regarding individual time.
“More time by myself is not what I need,” said one middle school teacher, and she spoke to the
need for more team planning resulting from a challenge with the schedule configuration this
year. Teachers across levels and focus groups reported that they feel they “are meeting every
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

129
time we are not teaching” and did not have time to take care of personal needs. The groups
echoed that while their needs for time fall into different categories, they all want to embrace and
make the most of the time they do have.

Table 22
Teacher Perception of Time
Survey Item

Percentage

I have enough time in my day to do the teaching I need to do.
60%
I have enough time to take care of all my extra responsibilities.
47%
I have enough time with my students.
53%
I have enough time to meet with my team.
56%
I have enough time to work with people who are in a different
subject area. 17%
I have enough time to work across grade levels.
13%
I have enough time to work across sections and get to know what is
going on across the other sections in the school. 10%
I have enough time to meet with my administrator.
42%
I have time to explore ideas or projects that are of personal interest
to me. 40%
I have some autonomous time in my schedule.
60%

Research Question 2
What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements necessary in the
professional environment to further support the teachers achieving the phenomenon of flow in
their implementation of the professional development program?
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

130
KMO and Teacher Flow
Flow is a phenomenon when someone feels intensely engaged and focused. In this state
of deep engagement, a person feels a loss of sense of time, and all their actions and awareness
merge. The result is increased productivity, engagement, and satisfaction. Teacher Flow can be
described as a teacher achieving this type of deep engagement while teaching. In this state,
teachers can take risks, feel motivated to set and meet goals, and are appropriately challenged
(Aubé, Brunelle, & Rousseau, 2014; Basom & Frase, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Lauman,
2011; Marshall, 2013). The regular achievement of this state correlates to job satisfaction and
retention (Csikszentmihalyi & LeFevre, 1989). This study asserts that if knowledge and
motivation within the ISLA student-centered professional development program and issues of
organizational culture are addressed simultaneously, setting the conditions for Teacher Flow to
occur, then achievement of the stakeholder goal will be more likely. So considering the
knowledge, motivation, and organization results that have come before in this chapter, and how
the elements of those results and findings may set the conditions for Teacher Flow to occur, we
also will look into how the teachers report their current abilities and support to achieve such a
state and validate KMO needs.
To begin with, we look at the degree to which teachers report being in a state of flow
while at work at ISLA. Figure 15 shows how often teachers feel they experience elements that
define flow. A remarkable 94% report that they are often or always “deeply engaged” at work
and a similar 93% report personal satisfaction on the job. Somewhat fewer teachers, 85%, feel
confident in their ability to meet goals and 84% report feeling there is balance between their
skills and level of challenge on the job. In contrast, 79% feel deeply engaged with goal setting.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

131
Figure 15
How Often do Teachers Achieve Flow States?

The only element of flow states that showed more widely disparate responses was the
feeling that time is lost or goes by very quickly. As shown in Figure 16, a total of 13% of
teachers reported that they seldom, rarely, or never experience the loss of time and 24% say they
experience it only sometimes.

23%
35%
31%
36%
51%
71%
58%
48%
27%
33%
Deeply engaged.
Personal satisfaction on the job.
Deeply engaged in personal goal setting.
Feel that time is lost or goes by very quickly.
Skills and level of challenge are balanced.
How often do you experience a state of Flow?
Often Always
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

132
Figure 16
How often teachers feel time is lost or goes by very quickly?

Support for Flow
The literature further asserts that school leaders play a significant role in supporting how
and if teachers have flow experiences with their work (Cartwright, 2006). Because a teacher’s
ability to achieve flow is profoundly connected to the student experience, supporting teachers to
achieve Flow impacts student engagement, well-being, and performance (Bassi, 2012). Figure 17
outlines the degree to which teachers report their perception of feeling supported to achieve a
state of flow, both individually and as teams. There are only minor differences in how teachers
report this support from their individual experience to the team experience (fluctuating from
neutral to agreeing about the presence of this support). Only 1% of teachers strongly disagreed
about receiving support for Flow. This result contrasts with 66% of teachers who agree or
strongly agree that they receive support in achieving flow as an individual, and 67% who agree
or strongly agree that they receive support in achieving flow as a team.

4%
3%
6%
24%
36%
27%
Never Rarely Seldom Sometimes Often Always
Experiencing a Sense of Loss of Time
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

133
Figure 17
Teacher Reported Beliefs About Support in Achieving Flow States

Flow is more likely achieved in work settings than outside of them (Csikszentmihalyi,
2013). Experiencing this phenomenon was described by ISLA teachers. Across the focus groups,
teachers shared experiences with achieving a state of flow at work.
Flow as an interactive cycle. Different structures at ISLA were found to support the
phenomenon of flow for different teachers. Some teachers felt they have been able to achieve a
state of flow within specific structures, such as their professional learning communities or other
types of structured interactions with their colleagues. One teacher shared:
We built the trust [in our professional learning communities] to then go into each other’s
classrooms, film each other, and deconstruct what we saw, which is an amazing way to
find that source of flow and to identify what techniques you’re doing that encourages it,
and what techniques are not being done, and also why it’s not there.
This theme of trusting peer observations to support teachers getting into a state of flow
was typical across the focus groups. A locally-hired teacher offered, “Observations that are
1%
10%
23%
46%
20%
1%
10%
22%
47%
20%
Strongly Disaagree Disagree Neutral (Neither
Agree not Disagree)
Agree Strongly Agree
Support in Achieving Flow States
I receive support in achieving a state of Flow in my individual work.
We receive support in achieving a state of Flow as a team.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

134
constructive create a setting of confidence for you, help you get into [flow.] It’s not just someone
sitting and looking at you. That doesn’t support you.” Another teacher talked about the
importance of engaged observations and the recognition that teachers “want to work on ourselves
because we are human.” She said flow should, therefore, be a “natural state” for a teacher.
Teacher leaders agreed with this sentiment. They likened peer observations to “an interactive
cycle of flow,” that the flow experience for them comes from processing and interacting, a give
and take with another person who is also somehow connected to the goal. One teacher leader
agreed and described it as “the knowing that someone else has been working on that too. It’s
when I am most in the zone.” She also pointed out that “time and the resources are big in
supporting me in getting to that.” Some teachers were able to achieve Teacher Flow through the
professional learning structures in place at the school. They saw the phenomenon as a natural by-
product of what they perceived to be as supportive connections with their teaching peers.
This connection with peers also came with some perceived caveats. A local teacher added
to the conversation that she felt “flow is dependent on knowing that is does not affect my job.”
An overseas-hired teacher explained, “Having structures that explicitly wall off professional
development from job security supports me in flow… my experience in my [professional
learning] community actually led to my flow experiences… because it was walled off in that
structure. I’m going to take risks. I’m going to try new stuff. I’m going to be 100 percent
honest.” An important aspect for this and other teachers was whether the experience was made
mandatory for the teacher, or if the teacher had the option whether they would engage in it or
not. Doing so, they felt, allowed a safe space for teachers to take risks and engage on a deeper
level.
Teachers reported that they do experience flow within their work structures at ISLA.
They shared that they deeply engage in their experiences, yet do so in multiple and varied ways
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

135
according to their own needs. The experience of flow is therefore very personal and grows from
a feeling of safety and security within a continued feedback loop. That feedback loop does not
appear to need to take a specific form. Just that it exists and is safe and constructive seems to be
the common thread.
Research Question 3
What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and the teachers’
knowledge and motivation to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices in
their daily activities?
Communication and Organizational Values
Organizational messaging, policies, and procedures must align with the goals and values
of the institution (Clark & Estes, 2008) as well as actual practice (Schein, 2004) for change
efforts to succeed. For the school to develop a strong professional learning experience that builds
teacher capacity and increases teacher engagement and retention rates, the organization must
clearly communicate (Kushman, 1992; Le Fevre, 2014; Schein, 2004; Schneider, Brief, &
Guzzo, 1996; Senge, 1990; Senge, 2014). That communication must also reflect the values of the
institution (Clark & Estes, 2008) and do so within its policies and procedures (Schein, 2004).
Communication
As we saw above in the previous discussion about motivation, teachers clearly have
utility value around communication. When probed about how the school has communicated
professional expectations about student-centered learning, teachers across the focus groups
hesitated. Teachers said things like, “I’ve just picked up on things.” Others added, “Over the
years, we’d had presentations from admin, both upper admin and my section administrator, our
team leader, and the [curriculum] department.” And our grade level coordinator kind of brings
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

136
some of that information down from the principal who, I think, brings the information down
from other administration.”
Another teacher added, “I don’t think they really have to be communicated, because if [a
teacher] is falling short… you stick out.” He spoke about the transparency of the physical
environment (i.e. large windows, open spaces), but then added, “Sometimes it is being explicitly
stated how you are to collaborate… but it should exist where it doesn’t.”
Goal Setting
Goal setting, and consistent work towards goals, support capacity building in knowledge
and skills. The way teachers engage in this process has affected their ability to implement
practices into their daily work. Survey results regarding knowledge about goal setting garnered
similar numbers to the teachers’ previously reported knowledge about professional expectations
at the school. As shown in Table 23, 94% percent of teachers felt confident about their own
ability to articulate clear individual professional goals, yet 14% less confident in their team’s
ability to do so.

Table 23
Teacher Reported Knowledge About Goal Setting

Survey Item

Total Percentage of Teachers
who
Agree or Strongly Agree

I can articulate clear individual professional goals. 94%

My team can articulate clear collective professional
goals.

80%

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

137
As we saw in the Knowledge results related to teachers feeling confident about their own
knowledge, they reported less confidence in their colleagues. We see this result repeated again
here. As shown in Figure 18, teachers overwhelmingly reported, 95%, that they often or always
have a high degree of confidence in meeting their individual goals. Very similarly, 94% report
that they often or always have a high degree of confidence in their teams reaching their goals.
However, it seems relevant to note that while there is a high degree confidence in both individual
and team, there is also a decrease in certainty about this confidence. As noted above in the
motivation and organization sections while discussing how trust affects teachers’ ability to take
risks with their goal setting, teachers must find support through the process of goal setting, find
encouragement in admitting vulnerability. The safety they find there will correlate to their ability
to continue to achieve flow, both individually and collectively with their teams. Goal setting can
also be seen as a form of academic optimism, a hopefulness in “what could be.” When schools
are bodies of academic optimism, it is more likely that flow will occur (Beard & Hoy, 2010). All
the more reason to support confidence in goal setting.

Figure 18
Confidence in Individual and Team Abilities to Meet Goals

36%
47%
49%
36%
High degree of confidence in meeting
individual goals.
High degree of confidence in my team
meeting goals.
Confidence in Ability to Meet Goals
Often Always
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

138

The findings of the focus groups validated these survey results on some levels. When
talking about reflection, teacher goal setting quickly emerged. The lack of a formal school-wide
goal setting process surfaced as a barrier; teachers feel that while they engage in reflective
processes on their own, “at [their] own impetus,” there is not a schoolwide structure in place that
supports them in doing so. “There has not really ever been a formal process,” said one teacher
leader. Another added, “It’s just not realistic because of time and no one following up on it.” The
overseas-hired teachers agreed, “I could take or leave my goals, but I care about growing
professionally, so it is on me.”
Job security and fear related to making these formal and informal reflections and goals
known emerged in the focus groups. An overseas-hired teacher reflected, “You have to be the
kind of person who is okay with taking risks… This is something everyone should be
comfortable to do, but it’s a cultural issue at the school.” While there is a degree of comfort and
confidence with goal setting and consistent progress with those goals, teachers feel they need a
safe, dependable process for them to make the desired progress.
Content Expertise
As we consider the knowledge and motivation needed for student-centered learning, and
how those needs interact with organizational culture and context, we look to how teachers report
feeling supported in developing those areas in their teaching. Teachers need to have a deep
understanding of how (through instructional strategies) to support students in making meaning
for optimal learning to occur (Zhao, 2015), yet the development of content expertise also
emerges as a significant theme. First, quantitatively, as shown in Figure 19, teachers report the
degree to how encouraged they feel to develop content expertise at the school. A total of 77% of
teachers either agree (38%) or strongly agree (39%) that they are in fact encouraged to develop
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

139
content expertise. It is perhaps significant to look at the other 23% of the sample population who
are neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree with the idea that they are encouraged to develop
content expertise. Disaggregated by content area, the subject areas that reported this end of the
spectrum represent many areas: math, language arts, lenguaje, estudios sociales, science, and
applied arts. The most concentrated content area that did not agree or strongly agree with being
encouraged to develop content expertise is science, followed by language arts teachers. Only the
areas of technology and social studies reported that they all strongly agree that they have been
encouraged to develop content expertise.

Figure 19

Teacher reported feelings of encouragement to develop content expertise

Qualitatively, teachers in the focus groups said they saw content expertise as both a
professional expectation and something they feel keeps them most engaged in their teaching.
One teacher said, “I want to continually improve, but I need to continually grow in my own
knowledge for that to eventually get to my students.” Another teacher said, “when I have content
1%
4%
18%
38%
39%
Strongly
Disaagree
Disagree Neutral (Neither
Agree not
Disagree)
Agree Strongly Agree
I feel encouraged by someone in our school to
develop my content expertise.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

140
expertise, it inspires my students.” Another teacher offered, “I’m definitely expected to know my
area. I need that to do my job well.” Another said, “We have to be in constant preparation” for
students to respect us and be motivated. Teachers see the importance of developing their content
expertise (utility value) and also see students as the direct recipients of that knowledge. A
majority also feel that they are encouraged to develop that content expertise and express their
desire for the school to continue that support.
Synthesis
This study utilized surveys and focus groups to identify the necessary resources for
teachers to implement student-centered teaching and learning strategies from a professional
development program into their daily activities, while best supporting the phenomenon of
Teacher Flow to increase student engagement. The data from the study suggest that attention to
and emphasis on the knowledge, motivational, and organizational factors acting as barriers to
this implementation will support the achievement of the organizational goal. Data analysis
indicated that the faculty at the school is a committed teaching force in many different stages of
their careers, who desire high degrees of engagement with their teaching. While this desire is
present, there are gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organization that can impede sustained
engagement with their craft and students. Addressing these barriers may lead to greater job
satisfaction, increased retention, and further engagement.
Data analysis suggested declarative, conceptual, and procedural knowledge gaps and a
lack of common and specific expectations about student-centered learning and the associated
strategies applied schoolwide. Teachers exhibited an understanding of expectations for
collaboration and team work and reportedly take steps towards constructively and intentionally
developing their teaching teams. They also understand and embrace expectations about meeting
the needs of all learners. While teachers declaratively understand this expectation of
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

141
differentiation, there is a gap in conceptual and procedural knowledge of how to do so. The data
also suggests a conceptual knowledge gap regarding specific schoolwide expectations about
student-centered learning. While teachers can speak about what student-centered learning means
to them personally, discussing what it means to the school is more challenging.
A specific identified gap in declarative and conceptual knowledge was in regards to
student-centered learning strategies and the expectation of collaborative work among students.
Teachers understand that students working in teams is important preparation for their futures in a
global workforce, yet saw it is as a barrier to some students’ learning. This indicates a possible
gap in both declarative knowledge, perhaps because the school has not made the expectation
clear, as well as a gap in conceptual and procedural knowledge in relation to a deep schematic
understanding of developing high functioning student teams.
The data easily identified gaps related to knowledge, yet found fewer gaps in regards to
motivation. The data suggested high individual and team efficacy in creating student-centered
learning environments. Teachers reported utility value for communication about student-centered
learning and high self-efficacy for this communication. Teachers see this communication as vital
to their position and ability to impact student learning. There were indications that this efficacy
was higher for the self than the team, yet there was still relatively high collective-efficacy about
the ability to create student-centered learning environments.
In addition to utility related to student-centered learning strategies, the data analysis
indicated that teachers across the school, in all capacities, also have high utility value for their
relationships with colleagues. They also place value on the ways which those relationships
contribute to the development of their teaching practice. Many teachers indeed have developed
trust in their colleagues, their teams, and their support networks at the school. The study
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

142
confirmed that this trust and relationship, and trust to be able to ask for and receive feedback and
support, was a validated motivational influence.
The data also found that teachers feel driven intrinsically. Teachers reported an
awareness of both this intrinsic value and the tentative nature of it should the perceived
organizational barriers become too challenging to overcome. Teachers therefore saw a
connection between their motivation and the cultural models and settings of the organization.
Data analysis suggested some critical gaps and divisions at the organizational level. The
data suggested a gap in teacher connection to organizational identity and common purpose at the
school. Additionally, comfortability and safety with creative friction, especially in regards to
administrators, is a validated barrier, source of divide, and an area to address. The study also
found the lack of a formal school-wide goal setting structure as a barrier to the teachers’ ability
to meet the stakeholder goal. The school needs a safe, dependable, and constructive process for
teachers to make the desired progress with the organizational goal. The data concluded that
teachers need reliable networks of support, to continue to develop teaching craft and content
expertise. Data suggested that various structures of support systems are more likely to effectively
and sustainably support different teacher needs.
Conclusion
This chapter has presented the results of the quantitative survey and the findings of the
qualitative focus groups as they have related to the first three research questions. The discussion
included both the assumed influences presented in Chapter Three as well as the conceptual
framework and the corresponding literature. The findings offer a unique look into the potentials
existing for schools as they usher in a new era of what it means to be a learner.
It is not surprising that the data would reveal the elusiveness of student-centered learning.
Schools around the world use the term to bring their constituents’ focus to the reason they exist
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

143
in the first place. Unfortunately, student-centered learning as a concept and why it is important
has yet to be concretely defined or commonly understood. The lack of these clear definitions
and rationale for student-centered learning has perhaps lead to the increasing disengagement
schools have and continue to experience.
One particularly unexpected finding in the study was how few differences there were in
conceptual knowledge about student-centered learning when disaggregating across grade levels
and content areas. While there were minor differences found in different subject areas and grade
levels, for the most part, one thing teachers shared was their inability to precisely pinpoint and
name specific markers for what it means to be student-centered according to the mission of the
school. For schools to truly nurture actively-engaged learners, these markers must be defined.
Though while ages, stages, and disciplines are unique, engaged learning and the characteristics
of the engaged teacher do not appear to discriminate.
Educational researchers and practitioners have often used the term “withitness” to
describe a “good” teacher. A teacher with “withitness” is engaged and aware and is “with it”
enough that they can respond seemingly intuitively to variables as they present themselves in the
classroom. Rodgers and Raider-Roth (2006) aptly describe this intuitiveness as “presence in
teaching.” These are all vital skills for teachers to develop. That said, as the findings here
suggest, it is limiting and perhaps irresponsible for educational institutions and teacher training
programs to place this responsibility on the teacher alone, as an individual. The data suggests
here that a systems approach would better contribute to the success of a teacher, and that the road
to successful student-centered teaching and learning cannot be one that a teacher should ever be
expected to forge on their own.
Thus, what overwhelmingly emerges from this data is the need to support a state of
Collective Teacher Flow, that is the state when teachers collectively, as a force, develop identity
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

144
and connectedness together and achieve deeper awareness, engagement, and productivity.
Teachers then take an active role in owning the system, rise together as designers and creators,
and provide a model for students to do so as well. The data here illustrates that even with a
highly motivated faculty, this state can only be sustained when organizational barriers are
addressed through clearly defined, communicated, and implemented policies, procedures, and
systems.
While teachers may enter the profession for a similar set of reasons, they come from all
walks of life, all backgrounds, all worldviews, and all different ways of interacting. In an
international setting, where schools are serving diverse populations of students and teachers this
collision of differences is increasingly noticeable. This study especially highlighted those
extremes in teachers’ ability to engage conflict as a necessary resource for growth and
improvement in the school. Therefore, a crucial consideration for schools is how they may be
able to nurture a system that gives teachers the opportunity to develop appreciations for different
work styles and ways of being in the world. The quality of feedback, reflection, and resulting
growth appears to depend on it. As schools then work to cultivate teachers' discrete skills in
embracing challenges and differing viewpoints, and then practice and model the associated
behaviors, their students will be more likely to be able to do this as well. This adaptiveness then
poises the students to embrace their changing world and the unique challenges they will face as
they attempt to solve its emerging problems.
For teachers to nurture that kind of environment, the organization must create the
conditions for them to do so. The data in this study illustrated the importance of differentiation,
for both students and teachers. The data also showed that deeper conceptual understanding of
this differentiation is necessary. For teachers to prioritize more individualized learning
experiences for their students, they must develop conceptual and procedural understanding of
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

145
differentiation, and their own professional learning plans should reflect such an approach. Again,
teachers should not be expected to seek out these kinds of personalized growth experiences on
their own. Schools will need to implement an intentional framework that supports meaningful
professional engagement.
Next, Chapter Five offers an outline of such a framework. The chapter makes
recommendations for the results and findings and provides an answer to the final research
question, “What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to
the identified needs?” The suggested interventions are offered based on the identified influences
found through both modes of inquiry. These recommendations offer a systems approach to how
organizations can support teachers as a collective force so they may, in turn, create the
conditions for students to thrive.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

146
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter Four presented the results and findings from the survey and focus groups in an
effort to answer the first three research questions, identifying the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs to implement optimal professional development in a student-centered
learning environment that results in maximum transfer. The results and findings also considered
those KMO influences to support deep teacher engagement, defined here through the lens of the
phenomenon of Teacher Flow. The results in Chapter Four also considered the interaction of the
organizational context with the teachers’ knowledge and motivation.
Chapter Five considers the final research question: “What are the recommended
knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions to those needs?” This chapter presents these
solutions to the identified and validated needs, within the context of the organization. Finally, the
chapter concludes with a proposed implementation and evaluation plan for the recommendations.
Discussion
Student-centered learning is a slippery concept. Many schools today purport to be
“student-centered” yet often lack a clear definition or frameworks for implementing programs
that truly engage students throughout their entire educational experience. Without clearly defined
outcomes for success, many students and teachers are left feeling isolated and powerless. P-12
education continues to see high turnover rates and increasing disengagement from both students
and teachers, yet the world of education is also making visible shifts to engage learners on all
levels. It is an exciting time to be a learner, on any level. As teaching and learning become less
isolated and increasingly collaborative, the nature of teacher professional development must also
shift.
This project found faculty at an American-international school in many different stages of
their teaching careers. Across the board, the project found teachers with a strong desire to
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

147
achieve high levels of engagement with both their teaching craft and their students. It found
teachers who are passionate, knowledgeable, and, by no fault of their own, have gaps in their
understanding of what the organization wants from them, and how to carry it out. It also found
organizational barriers for that acquisition of knowledge, engagement, and achievement to
happen. The study validated central organizational change and growth principles about the
importance of aligning goals and values to policies and structures, communicating clearly and
regularly, and embracing challenges and differences of opinion as a way to collectively construct
meaning within the organization.
One theme continually rising to the surface during this inquiry was differentiation. There
is increasing recognition that a meaningful learning experience is unique to each individual. As
such, the project found that many situations support teachers entering a flow experience, yet
some level of personalization, either through choice or some degree of autonomy was necessary.
If teachers are to be equipped to understand, appreciate, prioritize, and provide differentiated and
personalized learning experiences for students they also need to experience ongoing
differentiated professional learning that supports their own meaningful engagement. Schools will
also need to have an articulated, intentional framework for providing this.
Throughout this project, another important theme that repeatedly arose was the topic of
“team,” concerning both teachers and students. This concept is a critical idea with the potential
to evolve and offer avenues for further inquiry and evaluation. As a result of this impending
innovation the concept of Collective Teacher Flow emerges. As mentioned in the literature
review, the research identified the concept of collective efficacy and its effect on the ability to
achieve flow states as an area for further investigation. The literature abounds with the
importance of developing two things: self-efficacy (belief in one’s own ability to achieve a goal)
and connection to mission, goals, purpose, and identity through building trust and relationships.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

148
Addressing the individual has been a key tenant of flow theory in the past. The gap that existed
was how that efficacy and identity within a teaching team could be developed, harnessed, and
then leveraged together with the organizational policies and procedures. What emerges here is
the idea of Teacher Flow as a multi-dimensional school-based interaction, with challenge,
choice, and authentic goals driving the experience, refined further by support mechanisms and
targeted feedback. This has the potential to create collaborative school-work environments and
professional development opportunities that invite teachers to see themselves as a vessel and
model for ultimate engagement and synergy. To do so, also invites students to engage in not just
their learning, but also what it means to lead a happy, healthy, and meaningful life (McGonigal,
2015).
Teaching is a psychological investment in students. Gone are the days when education
was a private endeavor between just the teacher and student. Through research, our thinking has
evolved about the role of interaction, feedback, and reflection in learning. If teachers can connect
to their professional environment as a force, ultimately achieving collective states of flow, their
students are then more likely to. Addressing both the individual and the team within the context
of the organization as a whole, the following section offers recommendations that address the
interaction of teacher knowledge, motivation, and the organization and ultimately create the
conditions for Collective Teacher Flow.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
As this study is an innovation model, and a comprehensive P-12 student-centered
learning professional development program did not yet exist in the organization, from the onset,
the gap in performance was determined to be 100%. The goal was therefore that the International
School of Latin America would implement a professional development program focused on
student-centered teaching and learning strategies and consistent across all sections (P-12) of the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

149
school. The literature review focusing on teacher engagement in onsite professional learning
programs, current trends and strategies for teacher engagement and support, and challenges to
teacher engagement, identified several assumed influences and possible barriers to goal
attainment. These identified influences were categorized within the Clark and Estes (2008)
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) Framework. Addressing these barriers within
this model increases the likelihood of overcoming deficiencies in the organization and thereby
meeting the organizational goal (Clark & Estes, 2008) while also developing a deeply engaged
teacher population at the school who regularly experience a state of Teacher Flow. The
following sections outline the recommendations for the assumed influences and barriers
according to the KMO Framework.
Knowledge Recommendations
To achieve their goals, organizations must address knowledge gaps (Clark & Estes,
2008). Knowledge is categorized in four ways: declarative factual; declarative conceptual;
procedural; or metacognitive knowledge (Krathwol, 2002). Declarative knowledge (factual and
conceptual) are the “what” or content to be learned; procedural knowledge refers to “how,” and
metacognitive knowledge refers to reflection and self-awareness through the process (Krathwol,
2002). The intersection of these knowledge types leads to optimal learning (Seli, n.d).
There are four types of assistance organizations can provide employees to support their
knowledge development: information; job aids; training; and education (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Information is simply the outline of what individuals need to know in order to do their job. A job
aid is a more detailed checklist or formula, providing another level of support yet still less
“hands-on.” Training enters a more “scaffolded” realm of support. With training, employees are
provided both information and a job aid and also are provided guidance, support, and feedback
from another individual. Education is the final type of knowledge assistance. Education is the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

150
level of support that provides individuals with both theoretical and conceptual understanding and
strategies yet also equips them to respond to and deal with unexpected occurrences in novel ways
(Clark & Estes, 2008). This study recommends a comprehensive educational model
encompassing information, job aids, and training that would result in profound conceptual
understanding of student-centered learning that transfers to daily work with students of all levels
at ISLA.
In the area of knowledge and skills specific to professional development in schools, the
literature asserts that teachers must have clear awareness about the expectations associated with
student-centered learning in order to implement it (Estes, 2004; Lee & Hannifan, 2016), yet a
gap exists for both researchers and practitioners in regards to student-centered learning. Lee and
Hannifan (2016) cite a tremendous lack of guidelines or frameworks for schools to successfully
and comprehensively implement true student-centered learning practices. To efficiently transfer
understanding into daily work with students, teachers must have a developed cognitive schema
and clearly outlined conceptual understandings about student-centered learning. Teachers must
also be capable of differentiating between the elements of a teacher-centered and student-
centered learning environment and have a developed awareness of the inconsistencies between
values they and the school advocate for and their actual practice (Estes, 2004). Finally, it is
important for teachers to know (factually and conceptually) student-centered teaching and
learning strategies (Estes, 2004), understand how learning is achieved (Zhao, 2015), and be able
to spontaneously engage in these strategies (Estes, 2004; Van Leeuwen & Westwood, 2008).
This project found that ISLA teachers have a gap in declarative, conceptual, and procedural
knowledge about common and specific expectations related to student-centered learning and the
associated strategies applied schoolwide. The project also found a gap in knowledge about
specific differentiation strategies to meet student needs.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

151
Of the identified barriers and influences, all were validated or partially validated through
the quantitative and qualitative phases of the study. Due to this knowledge as the foundation and
core of the teacher capacity to implement student-centered learning from the professional
development program, it is recommended the organization prioritize them all. Table 24 below
outlines the complete list of the knowledge influences. The table also outlines related theoretical
learning principles and context-specific recommendations based on these principles and the
results of the mixed-methods inquiry. Following the table is a discussion of each of the
recommendations and the related literature.

Table 24
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations

Assumed Knowledge
Influence
D-F=Declarative Factual
D-C=Declarative Conceptual
P=Procedural
M=Metacognitive

Validated,
Partially
Validated,
or Not
Validated
(V, PV, N)

Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Teachers need to clearly
know the professional
expectations at the school (D-
F, D-C).

V

Y

Procedural knowledge
increases when
declarative knowledge
required to perform the
skill is available or known
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Effective change efforts
are communicated
regularly and frequently
to all key stakeholders.

Provide information on major
regulations and policies that
apply to professional
expectations.

Provide a job aid containing a
glossary of key terms found in
policies and handbooks that
clearly outlines professional
expectations.

Communicate this job aid in
multiple ways and at key times
throughout the school year.
Provide similar documentation
to all key stakeholders (board,
administrators, teachers, and
parents) so that all stakeholders
are part of the same
conversation about professional
expectations.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

152

Teachers need to have factual
and conceptual knowledge
regarding specific
schoolwide expectations
about student-centered
learning. (D-F; D-C)

V

Y

Effective organizations
ensure that organizational
messages, policies, and
procedures that govern
the work of the
organization are aligned
with or are supportive of
organizational goals and
values (Clark and Estes,
2008).

Creating schemata helps
learners to organize
declarative knowledge in
a domain (Schraw, Veldt,
& Olafson, 2009).

Define student-centered
learning at the school and
create policy around the
concept, ensuring that the
communication about the
concept aligns with strategic
planning and goals of the
institution.

Provide a job aid that includes
a clearly structured
chart/conceptual framework of
the school definition and
expectation about student-
centered teaching and learning.

Teachers need to have
procedural and conceptual
knowledge about meeting the
needs of all learners
(differentiation strategies).
(D-C, P)

V

Y

Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored more
quickly and remembered
more accurately because
it is elaborated with prior
learning (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Building on the school-
developed definition of
student-centered learning,
provide a job aid that details
differentiation strategies for
meeting the needs of all
learners that aligns with school
policies and goals.

Teachers need to know the
strategies associated with
student-centered learning,
including student-centered
dialogue, facilitation
techniques, and student
reflection. (D-F, D-C, P)
Related knowledge is that
teachers need to have
conceptual and procedural
knowledge in relation to a
deep schematic
understanding of developing
high functioning student
teams. (P)

V

Y

Procedural knowledge
increases when
declarative knowledge
required to perform the
skill is available or known
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

To develop mastery,
individuals must acquire
component skills, practice
integrating them, and
know when to apply what
they have learned
(Schraw & McCrudden,
2006).

Provide a job aid that compares
the details of the student-
centered learning definition
with specific strategies
associated with student-
centered learning, including the
benefits of each strategy and
when and why the teacher
would employ each strategy.

Provide opportunity for
teachers to discuss the
strategies and systematically
practice the strategies with their
students.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

153

Teachers must clearly
distinguish between student-
centered learning and
teacher-centered learning.
(D-C)

PV

Y

Acquiring skills for
expertise frequently
begins with learning
declarative knowledge
about individual
procedural steps (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Learning is highly
dependent on “goal-
directed practice” and
“targeted feedback”
(Ambrose, 2010).

Provide a job aid that clearly
distinguishes teacher and
learning strategies and guides
teachers through determining
whether a practice is student-
centered or teacher-centered
(i.e., a decision flow chart).

Provide training that utilizes
case studies for teachers to
practice identifying teacher-
centered vs. student-centered
teaching and learning.

Provide a framework for
teachers to set goals that are
focused on student-centered
teaching and learning practices.

Provide feedback targeted at
the degree to which goals are
student-centered.

Teachers need to be able to
reflect on whether their
teaching is student-centered
or teacher-centered. (M)

PV

Y

The use of metacognitive
strategies facilitates
learning (Baker, 2006).

Performance levels
increase and completion
times decrease with
increased self-regulation
skills (Clark & Estes,
2008).

This will be a part of a next
step once student-centered
learning is clearly defined and
communicated.
Provide teachers with a job aid
that includes stems for
metacognition about whether
their teaching is student-
centered or teacher-centered.

Provide teachers a framework
that encourages and focuses on
self-regulation.

Declarative knowledge solutions. Declarative knowledge is the recall and understanding
of the facts and concepts within organizational programs, structures, or policies. There are two
types of declarative knowledge: factual and conceptual. Factual knowledge refers to the
awareness of primary or essential facts. Conceptual knowledge refers to deeper, more complex
understanding of the knowledge where learners build schema and appreciation, and transfer can
take place (Krathwol, 2002). Based on the findings of the study, the school must work to develop
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

154
both types of knowledge: factual knowledge about schoolwide professional expectations and
conceptual knowledge about student-centered learning.
Factual knowledge: professional and student-centered learning expectations. The first
knowledge solution presented is factual knowledge about professional expectations. To develop
a robust professional development program at the school that builds teacher capacity and
engagement and increases retention rates, teachers must receive clear communication about
expectations, both professional and about student-centered learning.
While the study found that teachers understand some expectations about teamwork at the
school, and take steps towards developing their teaching teams, it also found declarative
knowledge gaps about specific expectations about student-centered learning and the associated
strategies applied schoolwide. It is therefore recommended the school provide a job aid
containing a glossary of key terms found in policies and handbooks that outlines professional
expectations with expectations about student-centered learning being a key component. This job
aid should be communicated in multiple ways and at key times throughout the school year.
Similar documentation should be presented to all key stakeholders so that all constituents have
an understanding about the professional expectations. Communication about these expectations
must be frequent for most effective understanding.
Conceptual knowledge: student-centered learning. To efficiently transfer the factual
understandings discussed above into daily work with students, teachers must also have a
developed cognitive schema and outlined conceptual understandings about student-centered
learning. Student-centered learning has constructivist, constructionist, and self-efficacy learning
theories at its core (Lee & Hannifan, 2016). Once teachers are aware of the specific expectations
for what it means to be a student-centered learning professional at ISLA, teachers may begin to
develop a cognitive schema about what student-centered learning wholly consists of, how
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

155
student-centered learning and teacher-centered learning differ, and the strategies associated with
student-centered learning.
Therefore, it is recommended that the school develop a student-centered learning
definition specific to the site and create policy and a framework around the concept, also
ensuring that the communication aligns with strategic planning and goals of the institution. To
support the further conceptual understanding, the school should also provide both a job aid and
training that includes a structured chart/theoretical framework of the school definition and
expectation about student-centered teaching and learning. As noted above, training would consist
of guidance, support, and feedback from another individual. This training recommendation is
discussed in more detail in the organization section regarding support systems. The creation of
student-centered learning policy documentation supports learners (in this case, the ISLA
teachers) in organizing declarative knowledge within a domain (Schraw, Veldt, & Olafson,
2009) and makes the transfer more likely. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) also remind us that
connecting learning to individual interests makes the learning more meaningful. So, having the
conceptual knowledge site-specific will support teachers in connecting the knowledge to their
daily experiences with students.
Information Processing Theory tells us that the manner in which knowledge is organized
affects how individuals learn and apply their learning to new circumstances (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). This conceptual knowledge must be clear and comprehensive, thereby
supporting transfer. Additionally, Behavioral Learning Theory states the need for an outline of
specific objectives to affect learning and transfer (Daly, 2009; Tuckman, 2009). Therefore, based
on the needs represented throughout the inquiry process, conceptual knowledge training about
student-centered learning should include the areas of: student role in learning; teacher role in
learning; learning environment; and feedback. ISLA teachers will then be better equipped to
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

156
specifically differentiate within their environment where student-centered learning is and is not
supported. A cognitive schema and explicit domains about student-centered learning must
therefore be developed regarding the conceptual understanding of student-centered learning so
that the teachers can best transfer their learning into their daily activities (Van Gerven, Paas, Van
Merrienboer, & Schmidt, 2002). Once this declarative knowledge is developed, it is more likely
there will be a higher level of ability to gain and transfer the next type of knowledge: procedural
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Procedural knowledge solutions. Procedural knowledge is the type of knowledge
required for an individual to know “how to” do a particular task. In addition to the declarative
knowledge outlined above, teachers must also be capable of differentiating between the elements
of a teacher-centered and student-centered learning environment and have the ability to identify
inconsistencies between values they and the school advocate for and their actual practice (Estes,
2004). This project found a procedural knowledge gap in teachers specifically knowing how to
apply student-centered learning, and the associated strategies applied schoolwide. The project
also found a gap in procedural knowledge about specific differentiation strategies to meet student
needs.
Clark and Estes (2008) suggest training as an efficient method of conveying procedural
knowledge. Building on the school-developed definition of student-centered learning, training is
therefore recommended as a viable method for imparting this procedural knowledge. Beginning
with low schematic levels of the elements of a student-centered learning environment, the
training should then slowly combine higher levels of understanding and development of
implementation strategies for student-centered learning. The training should utilize case studies
for teachers to practice identifying teacher-centered vs. student-centered teaching and learning
and continue to build schematic, conceptual understanding of high functioning, self-motivated
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

157
students, both as individuals and teams, and give teachers an opportunity to practice the skills in
a safe environment. This training method builds the body of knowledge over time through
segmentation, allows for practice with integration, leads to more skillful implementation,
increased expertise (Deans for Impact, 2015; Kirshner, Kirshner, & Paas, 2006), and more likely
development of mastery (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006).
Following the training up with a job aid that details differentiation strategies for meeting
the needs of all learners aligned with school policies and goals would further support teachers in
the effective, efficient, and ongoing transfer of skills. The same job aid should also provide
teachers a guide for determining whether a practice is student-centered or teacher-centered in the
way of a step-by-step decision flow chart. This training, practice, and continuous follow-up sets
the stage for increased metacognition about student-centered learning and the associated
practices.
Metacognitive knowledge solutions. Metacognitive knowledge is the knowledge and
self-awareness of thinking, process, and self-regulation (Seli, n.d.). Metacognition impacts both
teaching and learning (Mayer, 2011). Teachers must have the ability to reflect metacognitively
on whether their practices are student-centered or teacher-centered. They also need to reflect
about the elements of what they know, as well as what is not known, about student-centered
learning and the ways that knowledge impacts their work, so they can craft adequate goals for
themselves within a professional learning plan. The employment of these elements of
metacognition facilitates learning (Baker, 2006; Mayer, 2011) and provides the opportunity to
make meaningful connections (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). The study found that teachers
already feel confident in their metacognition within these areas, so it is not as necessary to
prioritize this as the other knowledge solutions. That said, once student-centered learning is
defined and communicated, it will be important to provide teachers a framework that encourages
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

158
and focuses on self-regulation regulation strategies to support their ongoing growth in this area.
Providing teachers with a job aid that includes stems for metacognition about whether their
teaching is student-centered or teacher-centered will continue to support their declarative and
procedural knowledge.
While teachers felt personal confidence in metacognition, they felt less confident in the
metacognition of their peers and teams. Therefore, it is important to provide job aids for teams to
metacognitively reflect as well as training for the team leaders in metacognition about student-
centered learning practices. Collective metacognition about practice has been found to be an
especially effective method of developing teachers (Lauman, 2011). Developing team structures
for this metacognition will increase continuity and connectedness (Bolman & Deal, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman, 2016; Schein, 2004; Senge, 2014), as discussed later in the chapter
detailing the organization recommendations.
Motivation Recommendations
Clark and Estes (2008) tell us that motivation consists of three essential factors: choice;
persistence; and mental effort. Choice is the decision to actively work towards a goal. Persistence
is the consistent work towards a goal, despite challenges or barriers. Mental effort is the
determined effort to learn anew in order to approach a task or address a challenge in innovative
ways (Clark & Estes, 2008). When these motivation factors combine with knowledge,
performance is enhanced (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The data from this inquiry did not show any significant gaps in motivation in the areas
explored, specifically, value (utility and intrinsic) and individual self-efficacy. There were,
however, some gaps in collective efficacy. Table 25 outlines these motivational factors
influencing the achievement of the stakeholder goal. The table also lists the theoretical principles
and related recommendations.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

159
Table 25
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations

Assumed Motivation
Influence

Validated,
Partially
Validated, or
Not Validated
(V, PV, N)

Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Teachers need to find the
usefulness of understanding
and prioritizing the
emphasis of student-
centered learning over
teacher-centered learning
(Value – utility).

PV

Y

Individuals are more likely
to engage in an activity
when it provides value to
them (Eccles, 2009).

Rationales that include a
discussion of the importance
and utility value of the work
or learning can help learners
develop positive values
(Eccles, 2006; Pintrich,
2003).

Learning and motivation are
enhanced if the learner
values the task (Eccles,
2006).

Include rationales for
student-centered
learning in the job aids
and training regarding
student–centered
learning strategies.

Teachers need to feel
engaged and find joy in the
process of working towards
the personal goals they have
set for themselves during the
goal setting process. (Value
- intrinsic)

PV

Y

1. Learning and motivation are
enhanced when learners
have positive expectancies
for success (Pajares, 2006).
2.

Activating personal interest
through opportunities for
choice and control can
increase motivation (Eccles,
2006; Schraw & Lehman,
2009).

In effort to continue to
nurture intrinsic
motivation,
incorporate aspects
that are personally
meaningful and
considered “fun” for
teachers in the
training, including
game-like approaches
to professional
development.

Provide unique and
different opportunities
for teachers to choose
from within the
training model.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

160

Individual Self-efficacy –
Teachers need to believe
they are capable of creating
a student-centered learning
environment.

V

N
3.
4. High self-efficacy can
positively influence
motivation (Pajares, 2006).

Higher expectations for
success and perceptions of
confidence can positively
influence learning and
motivation (Eccles, 2006)

The study found
teachers have high
individual self-
efficacy. This is not a
priority at this time.

Collective efficacy –
Teachers need to believe
their teams are capable of
creating a student-centered
learning environment
together.

V

Y

If there is perceived
collective efficacy, there is
an impact on performance,
commitment to the mission,
and the ability to deal with
challenges (Bandura, 2000).

When teachers perceive that
they have “collective
pedagogical teacher
culture,” engagement is
higher (Moller, Stearns,
Mickelson, & Banerjee,
2014).

Provide ongoing
opportunities for teams
to collaborate and
learn from peers,
tackle challenges
together, and
intentionally work on
mission related tasks
together.

Provide job aids that
outline elements of
team and the ways in
which team members
contribute to the
collective culture in
different ways.

Value. There are two types of value teachers must possess to achieve the goal of
implementing student-centered teaching and learning practices in their daily activities: utility and
intrinsic value. Utility value is the perceived utility or usefulness for the task (Eccles, 2006).
Intrinsic value is the perceived internal reward one experiences while completing a task (Eccles,
2006). This section discusses these values and related recommendations as outlined above in
Table 25.
Utility value. To create a student-centered learning environment, teachers must feel that
this type of learning environment benefits their students (Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik,
Guzdial, & Palincsar, 1991). This study found that while teachers admit that creating a student-
centered learning environment is more time-intensive, challenging, and requires different skills
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

161
than creating a traditional learning environment, they also see the value for students. Continuing
to provide foundational discussions about the value of a student-centered learning environment
further compounds this perceived utility value (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). While this is a
validated influence in the study, it is not a high priority since it already exists. Yet, as the school
creates job aids, it will be important to include rationales for student-centered learning. With this
type of job aid, the learners (teachers) are more likely to continue to have a positive attitude
about the evolution of student-centered learning at the school (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).
Intrinsic value. Intrinsic motivation is found to be a key factor in teacher success (Belle,
2009; Rodgers, 2002). Teachers in this study reported that they feel a deep sense of intrinsic
motivation related to their work in the school. They also reported that this intrinsic value could
possibly be compromised should organizational barriers prevent their ability to experience and
embrace their work in ways they perceive as enjoyable. This is therefore an important
consideration in the crafting of a professional development program that seeks to impact the
daily student experience. Numerous studies contend that engaging teachers in professional
activities and experiences that include systems of clear goals and purpose, milestones, and
rewards results in deep engagement and systematically builds thinking and capacity (Boyle,
Connolly, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012; Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Feigenbaum & Feigenbaum, 2013;
Henricks, 2015; McGonigal, 2011; McGonigal, 2015; Sicart, 2014; Whitton & Moseley, 2014).
Motivation also increases when one feels they have some control and choice in the process
(Eccles, 2006; Schraw & Lehman, 2009). The researcher therefore recommends that the
professional training and ongoing education about student-centered learning incorporate aspects
that are personally meaningful and considered “fun” for teachers in the training, including game-
like approaches to professional development.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

162
Efficacy. Efficacy is the belief that one is capable of completing a particular task. The
data from this inquiry process found high individual efficacy about creating student-centered
learning environments, yet indications that collective efficacy, the belief in the group to achieve
a goal, was lower. When there is collective efficacy, there is greater commitment and impact on
performance (Bandura, 2000). Teacher engagement in professional development therefore relies
on collaborative work among teams (Moller, Stearns, Mickelson, & Banerjee, 2014). It is
recommended that the school provide specified time for teams to collaborate and learn from
peers, tackle challenges together, and intentionally work on student-centered related tasks
together. To continue to increase collective efficacy the school should also provide outlines of
the various elements of an effective team and the ways in which team members contribute to the
collective culture in different ways. As stated above in the knowledge recommendations,
metacognitive reflection is also an essential element of success in implementation of student-
centered learning. This reflection as teams will also contribute to increased collective efficacy.
Organization Recommendations
Clark and Estes (2008) remind us that any presented solution must first consider
organizational culture for any change effort to be successful. Organizational theory divides
culture into two constructs: cultural models and cultural settings. Cultural models are the
internal, often invisible beliefs and values present in an organization. When addressed together
with knowledge and motivation, positive growth can occur. Cultural settings are what can be
visibly witnessed as an outcome of the cultural models (Hirbayashi, n.d.).
The data collected in this study suggests the most significant needs to be at the
organizational level. Table 26 below outlines the cultural models and settings as they influence
the stakeholder goal. The table also provides the guiding theoretical principles to inform the
related recommendations. These outlined influences include organizational recommendations for
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

163
building identity and continuity, feelings about conflict and creative friction, structures of teacher
support, and communication. The data validated or partially validated these influences through
the inquiry process.

Table 26
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations

Assumed Organization
Influence

Validated,
Partially
Validated, or
Not Validated
(V, PV, N)

Priority
Yes, No
(Y, N)

Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Cultural Model:
Organizational identity and
continuity.
Teachers need to feel
connected to organizational
identity and common
purpose at the school.

V

Y

The development of
organizational identity is
essential for organizational
growth (Schein, 2004).

Espoused values and beliefs
must align with messages
and concrete practices
(Clark & Estes, 2008;
Schein, 2004).

Shared interest, practitioner
involvement, and
community orientation are
three key principles for
organizational growth
(Berbary & Malinchak,
2011).

Teachers often feel
professional development is
disconnected from their
daily experience (Archibald,
Coggshall, Croft, & Goe,
2011).

When organizations
establish processes
collaboratively,
performance increases
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Building of collective
identity improves the way

Teachers must receive
clear communication
about expectations.
Implement a job aid
regarding
expectations,
organizational goals,
and elements of
collective efficacy.
See other
communication
recommendations
below.

Consider a pluralistic
model for resource
allocation (time and
financial).

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

164
that work is perceived
(Bolman & Deal, 2013).

Developing structures that
support collaboration linked
to capacity building makes
continuity and
connectedness more likely
(Bolman & Deal, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman,
2016; Schein, 2004; Senge,
2014).

Cultural Model: Conflict
and creative friction.
Teachers must have
comfortability and safety
with creative friction.
PV Y To encourage growth,
teachers must feel safe to
engage and participate in
expressing differences of
opinion or divergent
perspectives
(Csikszentmihalyi, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman,
2016; LeFevre, 2014;
Mayeaux, & Olivier, 2013).

Organizations that place
value on the role conflict
plays in developing
community experience
greater growth (Garmston &
Wellman, 2016; Senge,
2014).
Model the engagement
of creative friction at
the leadership levels.

Generate alternative
ways for stakeholders
to express their ideas.

Encourage
stakeholders to present
alternative viewpoints
to help address or
solve problems.

Recognize, reward, or
otherwise
acknowledge publicly
when employees
present divergent
points of view or
engage in healthy
creative friction.

Cultural Setting:
Communication and
organizational values.
There is lack of clear
communication of
expectations and values held
by the institution.

V

Y

Organizational changes take
root when beliefs and values
within the organization are
shared among its members
(Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo,
1996).

Stakeholders who use the
same language and have
common understandings
about the change are more
likely to be successful in
their endeavors (Gartner,
n.d.).

Leveraging communication
towards that success

Solicitation:
Continually take the
pulse of stakeholders
and work to
understand their
unique perspectives.

Instill a Listening
Tour and make a
related action plan to
make solicitation of
input more concrete.

Dissemination:
Repeat
communications.
Communicate the
same message to all
key stakeholders.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

165
involves multi-directional
engagement (Lewis, 2011).

Cascade
communication: create
methods of
communication that
moves through the
organization from
level to level, and,
then back again
through feedback
loops.

Change of Role
Schema:
Rethink roles in the
institution.

Provide opportunity
for all stakeholders
first to understand the
possibilities in the
imagining of new
roles.

Provide opportunity
for all stakeholders to
practice operating in
the new role as
imagined.

Cultural Setting Influence:
Support systems and
feedback. Teachers need
reliable networks of support,
to continue to develop
teaching craft and content
expertise. Various structures
of support systems are more
likely to effectively and
sustainably support different
teacher needs.

PV

Y

Support systems that are
self-directed, site-based, and
connect directly to the
strategic plan are found to
increase both teacher
effectiveness and student
achievement (Hanover,
2012).

Goal setting is an important
self-regulatory strategy that
enhances learning and
performance (APA, 2015;
Dembo & Eaton, 2000;
Denler, et al., 2009).

Using data for decision-
making improves
accountability and
organizational performance
(Clark & Estes, 2008).

Accountability measures
should be contextualized
and under constant review
as part of an evolving
process (Conner &

Implement an on-site
teacher mentor
program.

Employ goal setting
practices schoolwide.

Administrators
participate in training
that equips them with
both cognitive
coaching tools and the
understanding of how
to effectively drive
goal setting and data
work in their school
through effective
feedback loops.

Consider wider
understanding and
involvement of
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

166
Rabovsky, 2011; Darling-
Hammond & Snyder, 2015;
Hentschke & Wohlstetter,
2004).

School leaders play an
important role in building
capacity (Waters, Marzano,
& McNulty, 2003) and
using data (Marsh & Farrell,
2015).

Policies must reflect the
values and goals of the
institution and are more
successful when crafted
collaboratively (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Schein, 2004).

teachers in policy
development and
evaluation.

Cultural model: organizational identity. The data suggested an organizational gap in
teacher connection to organizational identity and common purpose at the school. The
development of such organizational identity is essential for organizational growth (Schein,
2004). The root of why teachers report disconnection to organizational identity was beyond the
scope of this study. However, there are strategies the school can implement to improve
continuity and connectedness. These strategies include: aligning messaging and evaluating
resource allocation.
Messaging. Clark and Estes (2008) remind us of the importance of organizational
messaging, policies, and procedures aligning with the goals and values of the institution for
change efforts to succeed. These espoused values and beliefs must not only align with the
messages of the organization, but also with concrete practices (Schein, 2004). To develop a
robust professional development program at the school that builds teacher capacity and
engagement and increases retention rates, teachers must receive clear communication about
expectations. That communication must both support and align with the values and goals of the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

167
institution. The policies and procedures must also reflect those values and goals (Clark & Estes,
2008; Schein, 2004). Using a redistribution model could ensure that the school community
receives the same messages and that practices for professional development opportunities align
across the institution according to these messages and values. A more funneled approach to the
messaging may result in teachers developing a more nuanced understanding of the professional
development program. Monitoring the process and participation becomes easier so that there is
greater assurance that the messages make their way across the institution with the same language
and understanding. Other specific strategies for this communication are addressed below in the
section about cultural settings and communication.
Resource allocation. The school may also consider an evaluation of resource allocation
as a means to developing organizational identity and continuity. The National Comprehensive
Center for Teacher Quality identified teacher learning and development as “often the most
weakly implemented” component of a teacher support system (p. 1) because teachers often feel
professional development is disconnected from their daily experience (Archibald, Coggshall,
Croft, & Goe, 2011). Identifying and allocating resources, including both time and funding, have
been identified as essential for the implementation of a professional development program to be
successful and impact student learning.
Ultimately, professional development must align with goals of the institution, bring
teachers together to collaborate, focus on instructional strategies, and include a continuous
feedback loop (Archibald, Coggshall, Croft, & Goe, 2011). Berbary and Malinchak (2011) cite
shared interest, practitioner involvement, and community orientation as key principles for
organizational growth. Additionally, when organizations establish processes collaboratively,
performance increases (Clark & Estes, 2008). By using a pluralistic model for resource
allocation, thereby creating shared interest and promoting practitioner involvement, the school
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

168
may be more likely to build collective identity within the organization. Bringing teachers
together in a joint approach links the community, making the work done within the institution
stronger as well as more focused. This building of collective identity improves the way work is
perceived (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Developing structures that support collaboration linked to
capacity building makes continuity and connectedness more likely (Bolman & Deal, 2013;
Garmston & Wellman, 2016; Schein, 2004; Senge, 2014) and contributes to employee
empowerment and buy-in (Fernandez, et al., 2015). As mentioned above, the school should
further explore the causes of teacher disconnect. Therefore, to better understand the issue, it is
recommended that the school conduct further analysis.
Cultural model: conflict and creative friction. The study also found disparate levels of
comfortability with conflict and creative friction as a validated barrier to goal achievement.
Organizational changes are most effective when employees are encouraged and feel empowered
to openly communicate their ideas, diverse perspectives, and differences of opinion. To promote
growth, teachers must be encouraged and made to feel safe to engage and participate in
expressing differences of opinion or divergent perspectives (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013; Garmston
& Wellman, 2016; LeFevre, 2014; Mayeaux, & Olivier, 2013). This kind of communication
should be both encouraged and celebrated as teachers shift from a traditionally solitary style of
working to a more collaborative one (Garmston & Wellman, 2016). Strategies the school may
implement to do so, include: modeling the engagement of creative friction at the leadership
levels, generating alternative ways for stakeholders to express their ideas, encouraging
stakeholders to present alternative viewpoints to help address or solve problems, and
recognizing, rewarding, or otherwise acknowledging publicly when employees do so.
Organizations that place this kind of value on the role conflict plays in developing community
are more likely to experience increased growth (Garmston & Wellman, 2016; Senge, 2014).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

169
Cultural setting: communication. As addressed above in discussing identity,
organizational changes take root when members share beliefs and values within the organization.
(Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996). To support that development of organizational identity,
careful and deliberate communication will be vital to its success. Stakeholders who use the same
language and have shared understandings about the change are more likely to be successful in
their endeavors (Gartner, n.d.). Leveraging communication towards that success involves multi-
directional engagement (Lewis, 2011). This section outlines recommended communication
strategies the school may utilize with teachers. These include strategies for soliciting information
and input, disseminating information through multiple means, and rethinking the roles
stakeholders currently see themselves playing.
Solicitation. Theorists suggest that knowledge is continually emerging in an organization
and what people “know” is always fluctuating (Lewis, 2011). With this in mind, it is essential for
organizations to continually take the pulse of stakeholders and work to understand their unique
perspectives. While the school has regularly surveyed the community in the past, they have
reportedly not typically made visible changes with the information gathered. Therefore, the
board and administrators should seek ways in which they can not only listen more deeply to the
needs of the various other stakeholders and customers, but also see that input informs some
decision making. One strategy to move the solicitation of input along the continuum, from less of
a symbol towards an actual resource, is to instill a Listening Tour. This strategy would not only
provide a forum for various stakeholders to provide background of their unique experience in the
school, but also a way to continually assess emerging knowledge at the school. From there, the
school must use the gathered information in a way that not only honors it, but also shifts some
decision making to other key stakeholders.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

170
Dissemination. Given that 65% of people in the organization must be “on board” with
any organizational change for it to be successful (Gartner, n.d.), it is important that ISLA
communicates forthcoming changes at ISLA in a way that builds trust. There are several
strategies to facilitate that communication. First, the school must repeat communications. The
community must hear the same message repeatedly, from all definitive stakeholders. The board,
the administration, and the teachers must all spread the same message throughout the
community. An effective strategy would be to cascade communication, which means that
communication should move through the organization from level to level, and, very importantly,
have built-in feedback loops that continually assess how the information landed with the
community. This communication strategy would then result in connection, understanding, and
engagement.
One important strategy the school must also consider is a way to support the opinion
leaders, connectors, and counselors to understand the changes and articulate risks involved.
Many organizations face roadblocks because of uncertainty (Lewis, 2011). When the
administrators and teachers deeply understand and can advocate for the change, the school can
avoid some of those roadblocks.
Change of role schema. Finally, as ISLA considers how it will move forward with
communication, it must take into account how it is a school steeped in tradition. That tradition is
compelling and makes the school the special place it is to the greater community. That tradition
also brings with it some habits and schemas that keep key stakeholders operating in particular
ways, making it difficult for them to either embrace change or see where they fit into new ways
of operating. Particularly during times of change, organizations must support stakeholders in
aligning their beliefs about their work with the expectations of the change (Lewis, 2011).
Therefore, the school must take steps to support stakeholders in rethinking what their role in the
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

171
institution is. In this way, the school needs to provide the opportunity for all stakeholders first to
understand the possibilities, and then to practice that new way of being. Only when those new
behaviors are part of a Habituation loop is the change realized (Gartner, n.d.).
Cultural setting: teacher support systems. The data from this study suggests that the
school needs institutional-wide structures that prioritize coordinated, reliable, and constructive
networks of support to reach all teachers and thus achieve its goal. This support should include
onsite training and self-directed professional learning options, and should connect directly to the
strategic plan. This level of teacher support is found to increase both teacher effectiveness and
student achievement (Hanover, 2012). This support should be coordinated between central
administration (district level) and each section of the school (building level) to effectively
translate it to the daily teaching practice (Elfers, Lucero, Stritikus, & Knapp, 2013).
The data also found that teachers need this support in various ways: both instructional
craft and content expertise. The school should also institute an on-site teacher mentor program to
ensure that each teacher is capable of implementing the student-centered teaching strategies into
their daily activities. Mentoring benefits both the mentor and the mentee. A mentoring structure
supports the development of trusting relationships (Martin, Buelow, & Hoffman, 2016), provides
essential models for student-centered teaching and learning (Estes, 2004; Van Leeuwen &
Westwood, 2008), and promotes the daily integration of knowledge and skills while also
supporting motivation (Hanover, 2012).
Goal setting and the use of data. A lack of a systematized approach to goal setting across
the school system was a validated barrier to teacher engagement with the professional learning
process at the school. Goal setting is found to be a critical self-regulatory strategy that enhances
learning and performance (APA, 2015; Dembo & Eaton, 2000; Denler, et al., 2009). As such, the
school should employ goal setting practices schoolwide. To enhance that goal-setting process,
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

172
the goals and actions towards those goals should be data-driven. Harris and Bensimon (2007)
discuss the importance of developing evidence-based awareness for goal achievement. Using
data for decision-making improves accountability and organizational performance (Clark &
Estes, 2008).
Leadership. School leaders play an important role in building capacity (Waters, Marzano,
& McNulty, 2003) and using data (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). When administrators actively
develop a culture of collaboration and openness, it is more likely that the faculty will focus on
data to make decisions and be successful in its accountability endeavors (Marsh & Farrell, 2015).
Therefore, it is recommended that ISLA administrators participate in training that equips them
with both cognitive coaching tools and the understanding of how to effectively drive this goal
setting and data work in their school through useful feedback loops. With increased knowledge
and skills, and a broad collective understanding of the vision, the administrators will be more
likely to lead the organization’s growth effectively.
Additionally, leader accountability increases when accountability is both internal and
external, and takes multiple forms (Marsh, Pane, & Hamilton, 2006). Externally, ISLA is
accountable to the recent recommendations for improvement made by its accrediting body.
Grubb and Badway (2005) established that external systems such as accreditation could inform
how schools develop and implement internal accountability systems. In this way, the leadership
team at ISLA must work together to implement accountability measures, and in doing so must
also be accountable for the implementation of those measures. Therefore, it is recommended that
in building the master professional development calendar, specific times should be set aside for
teachers and administrators to collectively understand the documentation defining the
professional learning experience at ISLA, elements of the strategic plan, accreditation
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

173
recommendations, and goal setting materials. With this collective support and triangulated
professional accountability, strong teacher capacity is more likely to be built.
Accountability and policy development. Accountability is the condition under which an
organization is responsible for the services it provides. Organizations should contextualize and
continuously review accountability measures as part of an evolving process (Conner &
Rabovsky, 2011; Darling-Hammond & Snyder, 2015; Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Capacity
development becomes increasingly important as the International School of Latin America
continues its work towards providing an educational experience that equips students with skills
to live meaningful lives. Increased accountability measures will support this process of growth
and continual improvement.
In a school setting, Darling-Hammond (2015) suggests, “For an accountability approach
to be truly responsible for the outcomes our children deserve and our communities require, it
must support a system that is cohesive, integrative, and continuously renewing” (p. 3). Any
resulting policies must ultimately reflect the values and goals of the institution and are more
successful when crafted collaboratively (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein, 2004). As the school takes
the next step in evaluating its professional development resource allocation, it is recommended
that the school consider wider understanding and involvement of teachers in policy development
and evaluation. Doing so would better poise the school to answer the questions Archibald,
Coggshall, Croft, and Goe (2011) raise, such as:
• Does the policy for professional development reduce the isolation and privatization of
teachers?
• Does the policy for professional development link professional development
opportunities to the goals of the school and create meaningful connections to the daily
educational experience?
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

174
• Does the policy for professional development establish a trusting professional learning
experience where teachers can take risks and creatively address problems?
• Does the policy for professional development resource allocation provide opportunities
for all constituents to understand the new vision of teaching and learning?
With a model in place for data-driven decision making grounded in published goals, the
school should also consider taking the following actions for increased accountability and
capacity building. The school should examine the elements of professional development that
leads to increased job satisfaction, teacher retention, and instructional expertise. The school
should also engage in an audit of all instructional practices and then analyze that data in
comparison to current student performance and student voice data. Finally, a system to measure
professional learning will be vital to further the ongoing development of the school program
(Marsh & Farrell, 2015). Once the program has been in place for at least one full cycle, the
school must then conduct a full-scale assessment audit of the progress and state of professional
development for its teachers. This assessment will further inform the practices and their ongoing
development (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). The next section presents a plan for implementing the
innovation and a system for its evaluation.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
In P-12 education, we increasingly plan with a “backward design,” meaning we plan
units, lessons, and learning experiences with the end in mind. Doing so helps educators articulate
essential questions, focus activities on building understanding of the concepts to be learned, align
formative and summative assessments to the content, and facilitate and maximize the transfer of
learning (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Effective planning for adult training also follows a similar
method. This plan for implementation and evaluation does just this.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

175
This implementation and evaluation plan utilizes the New World Kirkpatrick Model,
which evolved from the original Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluation (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The model includes four levels of training. This New World version presents
the levels in reverse order from the original. Therefore, the New World version begins with the
end in mind (Level Four). Level Four (Results) refers to the degree to which participants achieve
the stated outcomes from the training. Leading indicators, or observable measurements, are then
defined. Level Three (Behavior) then identifies the critical behaviors and required drivers to
reinforce on-the-job performance. Level Two (Learning) then determines the degree to which
learning occurred in the areas of knowledge and skill, attitude, confidence, and commitment.
Finally, Level One (Reaction) measures the impressions of the participants and the degree to
which they have found the experience relevant and engaging (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The New World Kirkpatrick Model is simple, straightforward, and flexible, yet does not
allow for shortcuts (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Just as the conceptual framework for this
study states all areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences must be addressed
together to produce the intended outcomes, the same is valid for implementing and evaluating
the innovation. The model declares three elements of effective training: that it is well-received;
provides the necessary and relevant knowledge; and increases efficacy and confidence in the
participants applying the new knowledge. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) further define
effectiveness as “improved job performance that positively contributes to key organizational
results." With intentionality given to the implementation and evaluation of this student-centered
professional development program, success is likely.
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The ISLA mission is to empower students to live meaningful lives through ethical and
active engagement with learning and contribution to community. While the student population at
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

176
ISLA remains consistent from kindergarten through 12th grade, the school has a relatively high
overseas-hire turnover rate and reported teacher disconnection from the school goals which pose
challenges to the organization’s growth, development, and sustainability of programs. It is the
school’s goal to create a systematic and comprehensive on-site P-12 faculty professional
development program that builds capacity, increases retention, and provides strong, sustainable
programs so the school can offer high-quality educational experiences that equip students with
the tools necessary to lead meaningful lives.
This project examined the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
and barriers to teachers’ capability to implement student-centered teaching and learning practices
in their daily activities. While all stakeholder perspectives are essential to consider and address,
this project looked explicitly at teacher-related influences. The proposed solution, a holistic P-12
professional learning experience includes job supports for student-centered learning. The
program provides the support teachers require, creating the conditions for the achievement of
Teacher Flow, ensuring increased engagement with teaching craft, understanding of professional
expectations, and professional growth opportunities that result in increased student achievement
and achievement of the school-wide strategic goals.
Level Four: Results and Leading Indicators
As ISLA implements a comprehensive P-12 professional development program that
ensures transfer of student-centered teaching and learning practices into daily activities, it is vital
to monitor progress towards the outcomes. Developing and measuring leading indicators support
organizations in determining whether goals are met (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). As such,
there are specific leading indicators that act as signposts throughout the implementation of the
innovation, which will either serve to identify on-going adjustments to the program or signify
goal achievement. These indicators are both internal and external short-term outcomes.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

177
Internal outcomes include policy development about student-centered learning, increased
understanding of student-centered learning expectations, use of common language about student-
centered learning, and all teachers engaging in the P-12 professional development program, with
mentors and differentiated professional development opportunities. As the school achieves the
internal outcomes, it can then expect to see the external outcomes also realized. External
outcomes include increased retention and job satisfaction rates, and student engagement in
meaningful, student-centered learning activities. Table 27 below outlines these internal and
external outcomes and the related metrics and methods for measuring them.

Table 27
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increased retention rates of
teachers.
Number of returning teachers each year.
Number of teaching vacancies each year.
HR data regarding number of
faculty vacancies.
Increased school
satisfaction rates.
Number of faculty who report satisfaction
on the job.
Number of students who report satisfaction
with their learning experiences.
Number of parents/community members
who report satisfaction with their child’s
educational experience.
Faculty, student, and parent
climate surveys.
Students actively engaged
in meaningful learning on
a daily basis.
The types and number of activities students
are engaged in, based on the site-based
definition of student-centered learning.
Aggregate data from observation
forms.
Student survey data.
Task analysis from curricular
planning documentation.

Internal Outcomes
Policy developed about
student-centered learning.
Published policy. Solicit information/data from
handbooks.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

178
Increased understanding of
common expectations for
teaching and learning.
Number of faculty who report understanding
of professional expectations.

Faculty climate survey.
Common language utilized
across the school
regarding student-centered
teaching and learning
practices.
Number of faculty who speak about student-
centered learning in common ways across
the sections of the school.
Data from interviews regarding
instructional and professional
development practices at the
school.
Teachers have models and
mentors for student-
centered learning.
Number of teachers engaged with a
mentoring program on the campus.

Number of observations teachers engage in
with peers or mentors.
Data from interviews regarding
instructional and professional
development practices at the
school.
100% of P-12 faculty
engaged in schoolwide
goal setting and site-based
professional development.
Number of teachers who develop
professional development plans.
Solicit data from the site-based
professional development
software/database.
Teachers engaged in a
differentiated professional
learning experience.
Number of different types of professional
learning.
Solicit information from database
of professional learning activities.

Level Three: Behavior
Critical behaviors. What happens in Level Three, after training, is the most significant
and also the most challenging part of an implementation and evaluation plan because of the
difficulty in supporting and holding stakeholders accountable for applying their learning
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Therefore, it is essential that faculty behaviors are monitored
to ensure goal achievement. These behaviors include learning the components of the framework
for student-centered learning, teacher documentation of student-centered learning goals,
identification of teacher learning needs in regards to student-centered learning, establishment of
professional learning communities, and attendance and engagement in team meetings. Table 28
below outlines each of these critical behaviors, their related metrics, methods, and timing.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

179
Table 28
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing

1. Faculty will learn the
components of the
framework for student-
centered learning.

The number of student-
centered learning activities
implemented.

Curriculum department will
present training related to
framework.

Data collected during
observations.

During the first 60 days
of employment. Initially
shared through
onboarding process and
then repeated within the
first month of teaching.
Thereafter, repeated
annually.

Ongoing throughout
school year.

2. Faculty will document
student-centered
learning goals.

The completion of clear
student-centered goals.

The degree to which goals
are student-centered.

Teacher portfolio updated.

Annually documented,
with reflections and
revisions
added/completed each
term thereafter.

3. Faculty will identify
personal professional
learning needs in
regards to student-
centered learning.

The number of identified
needs across the faculty.

Mentor will review and
discuss initial needs.

Team lead will lead
discussion of individual and
team needs.

Teachers will report
identified needs on the
professional learning
database.

In first year at the
school: quarterly.

Thereafter, semi-
annually.

4. Faculty will establish
professional learning
communities where
they can share
resources, dissect
dilemmas, engage in
discourse, examine
instructional strategies,
and reflect on their
practice.

The number of
professional learning
community meetings
attended.

Professional learning team
lead will track attendance and
take pulse checks of
engagement.

Monthly.

Required drivers. The critical behaviors outlined above cannot exist on their own. The
organization must also nurture the environment with particular supports for the critical behaviors
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

180
to thrive. These supports are called required drivers. There are four types of drivers: reinforcing;
encouraging; rewarding; and monitoring. Reinforcing drivers are those that emphasize the
importance of the transfer of the new skills into the daily activity (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). These include the knowledge related solutions outline previously in the chapter, such as
job aids supporting student-centered teaching and learning strategies and organizational solutions
including meeting structures. Encouraging drivers are those systems, supports, and processes that
provide consistent inspiration for participants to continue the transfer of the skills (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The encouraging drivers include motivation related solutions such as
rationales that provide utility value for student-centered learning, the modeling of strategies, and
targeted and useful feedback. Rewarding drivers are those which recognize the appropriate
implementation of the skills (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). These rewarding drivers include
public recognitions and publication incentives for the student-centered work. Table 29 below
outlines the reinforcing, encouraging, and rewarding drivers necessary for teachers to implement
student-centered learning in their daily activities, and which critical behaviors they support.
Following the table, we discuss the remaining driver, monitoring.

Table 29
Required Drivers to Support Student-centered Learning Practices in Daily Activities
Method(s) Timing

Critical Behaviors Supported

Reinforcing

Job aid containing a glossary of key
terms found in policies and
handbooks that clearly outlines
professional expectations.

Ongoing

1, 2, 3

Job aid that includes a clearly
structured chart/conceptual
framework of the school definition

Ongoing

1, 2, 3
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

181
and expectation about student-
centered teaching and learning.

Job aid that details differentiation
strategies for meeting the needs of
all learners that aligns with school
policies and goals.

Ongoing

1, 2, 3

Job aid that outlines elements of
team and the ways in which team
members contribute to the collective
culture in different ways.

Ongoing

1, 2, 3, 4

Job aid that compares the details of
the student-centered learning
definition with specific strategies
associated with student-centered
learning, including the benefits of
each strategy and when and why the
teacher would employ each strategy.

Ongoing

1, 2, 3

Meetings to collaborate and learn
from peers, tackle challenges
together, and intentionally work on
mission related tasks together.

Bi-monthly

3, 4

Meetings for teachers to discuss the
strategies.

Weekly

1, 2, 3, 4
Encouraging

Rationale for student-centered
learning (utility value)

Ongoing

1, 2, 3

Mentor observations

Bi-monthly

1, 2, 3

Peer modeling during team
meetings.

Monthly

1, 2, 3, 4
Presentations of alternative
viewpoints to help address or solve
problems.

Ongoing

1, 2, 3, 4

Teachers receive targeted and useful
feedback from peers, mentors, and
supervisors

Weekly

1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding

Public recognition on school
website, blog, and monthly
publications when individuals or
teams successfully implement
student-centered learning strategies.

Monthly, or project-based

1, 2, 3, 4

Public acknowledgment when
employees present divergent points
of view or engage in healthy
creative friction.

At monthly meetings, when
appropriate

1, 2, 3
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

182
Monitoring. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) discuss drivers in two ways: support and
accountability. The previous table outlined the support drivers. As discussed earlier in the
chapter, accountability systems are the way an organization takes responsibility for what it offers
to its community and must remain under constant review to stay relevant (Conner & Rabovsky,
2011; Darling-Hammond & Snyder, 2015; Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). Therefore, the
review of teacher goals and related action plans is an essential aspect of monitoring these drivers
of the critical behaviors. Mentors, team leaders, and administrators are all crucial players in this
review and follow-up. The knowledge, motivation, and organization needs for these key support
roles is beyond the scope of this dissertation and should be explored further. Additionally,
dashboards that support teachers in self- and peer-monitoring with highlighted key performance
indicators and bi-annual surveys and interviews also support accountability for the required
drivers and critical behaviors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Level Two: Learning
Learning goals. Following completion of the recommended solutions through the
implemented P-12 professional development program, the faculty will be able to:
1. Accurately identify student-centered learning strategies (Declarative Knowledge).
2. Confidently implement a variety of strategies to meet student needs (Procedural
Knowledge).
3. Value the importance of creating a student-centered learning environment (Value).
4. Reflect on the strategies they employ to nurture student-centered learning
(Metacognition).
5. Adjust the learning environment and teaching plans to reflect student-centered
learning approaches (Procedural Knowledge).
6. Engage constructively with colleagues and administrators (Cultural Model).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

183
7. Confidently work as a team to meet student-centered learning goals (Collective-
efficacy).
8. Monitor progress towards student-centered goals and make adjustments where
necessary (Efficacy, Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge).
Program. The P-12 professional learning program is a comprehensive plan for assuring
student-centered teaching and learning at the school. This program supports teachers in
achieving the above stated learning goals through foundational supports in understanding the
elements of student-centered learning expectations at the school, utilizing common language
about that student-centered learning, and actively engaging in the successful implementation of
associated strategies and techniques. Additionally, the program engages teachers in developing
an awareness and appreciation for the benefits student-centered learning has for their students as
well as their own fulfillment and engagement with the art of teaching. Furthermore, the teachers
will engage in communication techniques, focused goal setting, and feedback loops designed to
support them individually and as teams.
Throughout the process, the school will provide job aids for expectations and strategies,
exemplars, models, and flow charts that support teachers in identifying and matching student-
centered learning activities to the appropriate learning target. The training program will take
place in an ongoing manner throughout the school year. The program is implemented in a
blended learning format, with a combination of asynchronous job aid school made videos
illustrating both expectations and exemplars. To support the learning further, team leaders,
mentors, instructional coaches, and administrators will check for understanding on an ongoing
basis through coaching sessions and observations.
During monthly in-person training afternoons, the teachers will emphasize the application
of skills learned through the job aids and asynchronous materials. Teachers will work in teams to
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

184
present strategies they have practiced in their daily work and will receive feedback from peers.
Whether teachers have presented or provided feedback they will revisit their student-centered
learning goals and set new targets for themselves. This practice is designed to encourage
constructive individual and team learning and systematic metacognition.
Components of learning. As teachers attempt to implement student-centered learning
strategies into their daily activities, they need to feel they have the pertinent knowledge.
Therefore, it is important to evaluate the degree to which teachers have learned the declarative
and procedural knowledge. Table 30 outlines these methods for evaluation of these components
as well as the timing.

Table 30
Components of Learning for the Program
Methods Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”

Knowledge checks using check-list validation
though discussions, think-pair-shares, and
other individual/group activities.

Periodically during the in-person workshop
and documented via observation notes.

Knowledge checks through gamified
experience within the goal-setting process to
demonstrate understanding of expectations.

Immediately following the video job aids and
first workshop afternoon.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”

Demonstration of individual use of the job aids
to successfully implement the student-centered
learning strategies.

Through observation notes and reports from
team leaders.

Demonstration of teams to use the job aids to
successfully engage in student-centered
conversations.

Through observation notes and reports from
team leaders.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

185

Quality of instructional planning and the
degree to which plans are student-centered
according to job aids.

Through curriculum map checks.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Pre- and post-surveys

Quarterly through the year.

Discussions of the value of what they are being
asked to do on the job.

During the coaching and feedback sessions
with mentors, instructional coaches, and
supervisors.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”

Scaled survey
Following workshop afternoons or when new
student-centered learning strategies are
introduced.

Discussions following practice and feedback.

During the team meetings and individual
coaching sessions.

Commitment “I will do it on the job.”

Creation of individual and team goals and
related action plans.

During workshop and team meetings.

Level One: Reaction
In Level One, there are three reactions Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommend
measuring. They are engagement, relevance, and satisfaction. These three components are vital
to the success of the program. With high levels of each of them, the program is more likely to
yield the desired results. As with the components of the learning program above, Table 31 below
similarly outlines the components to measure reactions from the program.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

186
Table 31
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement

Attendance

During workshop and team meeting afternoons
Completion of goals in Learning Management
systems

Following the goal setting workshop
Observation

During workshop and team meeting afternoons
Relevance

Brief pulse-check with participants via scaled
survey (online) and discussion (ongoing)
Following workshop afternoons or when new
student-centered learning strategies are
introduced

End of term evaluation of program Two weeks following the end of each term

Satisfaction

Brief pulse-check with participants via scaled
survey (online) and discussion (ongoing)
Following workshop afternoons or when new
student-centered learning strategies are
introduced

End of term evaluation of program Two weeks following the end of each term

Evaluation Tools
Evaluation of the program through participant feedback helps to “improve the program,
to maximize transfer of learning to behavior and subsequent organizational results, and to
demonstrate the value of training to the organization” (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016, p. 5).
Multiple methods will inform the evaluation so that the facilitators of the training can acquire a
comprehensive understanding of participant experience and outcomes, and understand the ways
to best move the program forward. The following sections summarize the evaluation tools used
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

187
during and immediately following the program implementation and delayed evaluation tools
based on the timeline Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggest.
During and immediately following the program implementation. During each of the
face-to-face workshop afternoons, teachers will participate in “exit ticket” surveys that will
assess their confidence in applying the new skills, commitment to that application, perceived
relevance to their daily work, and overall satisfaction with the content, delivery, and general
structure of the workshop. The training facilitators will solicit Level One feedback about
relevance during the workshops through discussion and pulse-check “exit tickets” that ask
participants to share (either verbally in a round or through a digital- or whiteboard brainstorm in
which all participants silently add comments simultaneously) at least one “new learning” and at
least one “wondering.” These pulse-checks will give facilitators an overall understanding of
group Level One and Level Two takeaways. Additionally, a final reflective discussion or online
prompt will ask participants to identify one or more ways teachers can apply the information
when they return to their classrooms.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Follow-up evaluation will
occur after a delayed period of time, usually within a few weeks to allow for further synthesizing
of the information and practice implementation of the strategies. A blended model, incorporating
all the levels from reaction to results makes it more likely to maximize perspective on the
experience (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The evaluation tool should include survey items
assessing engagement, relevance, and satisfaction (Level One), confidence in and value of
knowledge acquired (Level Two), the degree to which the participant applied the learning (Level
Three), and the degree to which the training has impacted daily the learning environment (Level
Four). See Appendix E for a sample blended evaluation survey.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

188
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level Four goals for the implementation of the P-12 professional development
program consist of increased teacher retention, increased school satisfaction rates, and students
actively engaged in meaningful learning activities on a daily basis. For greatest impact, it is
important to make the learning and progress towards the goal visible. Following the program
evaluation, the facilitators should visually report the findings on the dashboard within the faculty
professional learning portal of the school website. Figure 20 below demonstrates this dashboard
with example data regarding the student-centered learning goals. The Office of Professional
Learning could create similar dashboards to monitor Levels One and Three.

Figure 20
Sample dashboard to report progress toward goals

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

189
Summary
This implementation and evaluation plan was designed using the New World Kirkpatrick
Model. This backward design model begins with the ultimate organizational goals and then
identifies the necessary learning and assessment components to incrementally and systematically
realize those goals. This framework is proactive and places learning at the center, as should be
the case in all student-centered learning environments. Through this process, success is defined
from the beginning and offers the organization a clear return on expectations (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Through this model, the school can address the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences defined and validated in this study, setting the conditions for an
actively engaged, productive, dynamic, and satisfied teaching force. This, in turn, can only
translate into helping invite an engaging and consummate educational experience for students.
Conclusion
The purpose of this project was to identify the resources necessary for the intentional
design of a comprehensive P-12 student-centered learning professional development program.
This model would ensure implementation of student-centered teaching and learning strategies
into daily activities, while also best supporting deep teacher engagement, defined here through
the lens of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. Ultimately, the project recognizes that as
paradigms for education shift to invite increased student engagement, so must professional
development to likewise engage teachers. This project examines multiple learning, motivation,
and organizational change theories and finds notable areas to address in teacher professional
development. Utilizing Information Processing and Behavioral Learning theories, the project
makes recommendations for developing a shared understanding and conceptual knowledge of
student-centered learning. Utilizing Expectancy Value and Efficacy theories, the project
recommends strategies to increase motivation for individual and collective teacher engagement
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

190
in professional development. Through organizational and change theories, the project validates
the importance of communities accepting and encouraging creative friction for organizational
growth that results in increased student learning and meaningful engagement. These theories
come together in a multidimensional interaction within the organization. From this interaction of
challenge, choice, authentic goals, support systems, and feedback emerges the conditions for
Collective Teacher Flow to occur across a whole system. The comprehensive educational model
recommended here systematically provides concrete steps for creating these conditions. Doing so
offers an opportunity for teachers to rise as creators and designers so students can too.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

191
References
Aubé, C., Brunelle, E., & Rousseau, V. (2014). Flow experience and team performance: The role
of team goal commitment and information exchange. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1),
120-130.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/, September 14, 2016.
Bakker, A. B. (2005). Flow among music teachers and their students: The crossover of peak
experiences. Journal of vocational behavior, 66(1), 26-44.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9,75–78. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Basom, M. R., & Frase, L. (2004). Creating optimal work environments: Exploring Teacher
Flow experiences.
Bassi, M., & Fave, A. D. (2012). Optimal experience among teachers: New insights into the
work paradox. The Journal of psychology, 146(5), 533-557.
Beard, K. S., & Hoy, W. K. (2010). The nature, meaning, and measure of Teacher Flow in
elementary schools: A test of rival hypotheses. Educational Administration Quarterly,
46(3), 426-458.
Berry, B., Byrd, A., & Wieder, A. (2013). Teacherpreneurs: Innovative teachers who lead but
don't leave. John Wiley & Sons.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991).
Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning.
Educational psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

192
Boyle, E. A., Connolly, T. M., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). Engagement in digital
entertainment games: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 771-
780.
Buckalew, M. W. (2013). Teaching Excellence II: A Research-Based Workbook for Teachers.
Independent School Management.
Bullough Jr, R. V., & Pinnegar, S. (2009). The happiness of teaching (as eudaimonia):
Disciplinary knowledge and the threat of performativity. Teachers and Teaching: theory
and practice, 15(2), 241-256.
Cartwright, N. C. (2006). Supporting creative Teacher Flow: Exploring the relationship between
Csikszentmihalyi's concept of optimal flow experiences and Bolman and Deal's principal
leadership orientations. ProQuest.
Chametzky, B. (2014). Andragogy and engagement in online learning: Tenets and solutions.
Creative Education, 2014. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 12(2), 241-
258
Clark, R. E. (n.d.) Gap Analysis: Learning and Motivation, Retrieved from
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109238, September 1, 2016.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., Perry, N. E., & Martin, A. J. (2015). Teacher well-being: Exploring
its components and a practice-oriented scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,
33(8), 744-756.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Chapter 1.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Flow: The psychology of happiness. Random House.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

193
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & LeFevre, J. (1989). Optimal experience in work and leisure. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 56(5), 815.
Culp, K. M., Keane, J. T., Meade, T., & Nudell, H., (2004). Education Development Center,
New York, NY. Center for Children and Technology. Formative evaluation of the
intel[R] design and discovery curriculum report. CCT reports .Education Development
Center, Inc.
Curry, M. (2008). Critical Friends Groups: The Possibilities and Limitations Embedded in
Teacher Professional Communities Aimed at Instructional Improvement and School
Reform. Teachers College Record. April 110.4: 733-74. Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Daly, E. (2006) Behaviorism. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/behaviorism/, November 22, 2016.
Darling-Hammond, L., Amrein-Beardsley, A., Haertel, E., & Rothstein, J. (2012). Evaluating
teacher evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(6), 8-15.
Deans for Impact (2015). The Science of Learning. Austin, TX: Deans for Impact.
Desroches, S. M. (2013). Exploring Teacher Turnover in American-Accredited Schools in South
America.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/,
September 1, 2016.
Estes, C. A. (2004). Promoting student-centered learning in experiential education. Journal of
Experiential Education, 27(2), 141-160.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

194
Evers, W. J., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2002). Burnout and self-efficacy: A study on teachers'
beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. British
Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 227-243.
Feigenbaum, A., & Feigenbaum, A. (2013, September). Gameful Pedagogy and Collaborative
Learning a Case Study of the Netsx Project. In Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious
Applications (VS-GAMES), 2013 5th International Conference on (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
Fernández-Oliveras, A., & Oliveras, M. L. (2015). Conceptions of science, mathematics, and
education of prospective kindergarten teachers in a play-based training. International
Journal on Advances in Education Research, 2(1), 37-48.
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE. Chapter 4, pp. 79–98.
Gallup, Inc. (2014). State of America’s Schools: The Path to Winning Again in Education.
Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/services/178769/state-america-schools-
report.aspx, January 20, 2017.
Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (2016). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing
collaborative groups. Rowman & Littlefield.
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162-183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Gray, L., and Taie, S. (2015). Public School Teacher Attrition and Mobility in the First Five
Years: Results From the First Through Fifth Waves of the 2007–08 Beginning Teacher
Longitudinal Study (NCES 2015-337). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved [date] from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch, February 20, 2016.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

195
Hallam, P. R., Smith, H. R., Hite, J. M., Hite, S. J., & Wilcox, B. R. (2015). Trust and
collaboration in PLC teams: Teacher relationships, principal support, and collaborative
benefits. ISLASP Bulletin, 99(3), 193-216.
Hanover (2012). Effective teacher professional development: what the literature says. Hanover
Research - District Administration Practice.
Hargreaves, D. H. (1999). The knowledge-creating school. British journal of educational studies,
47(2), 122-144.
Hart, H., Healey, K., & Sporte, S. E. (2014). Measuring up. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(8), 62-66.
Hastings, M., & Agrawal, S. (Jan. 9, 2015). "GALLUP POLL: Lack of Teacher Engagement
Linked to 2.3 Million Missed Workdays." Lack of Teacher Engagement Linked to 2.3
Million Missed Workdays. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/180455/lack-
teacher-engagement-linked-million-missed-
workdays.aspx?g_source=teacher%20engagement&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tile
s, March 13, 2016.
Henricks, T. S. (2015). Play as Self-Realization—Toward a General Theory of Play. The
Handbook of the Study of Play, 2, 1.
Henry, K. L., Knight, K. E., & Thornberry, T. P. (2012). School disengagement as a predictor of
dropout, delinquency, and problem substance use during adolescence and early
adulthood. Journal of youth and adolescence, 41(2), 156-166.
Hewitt, A. (2012). Trends in global employee engagement. Aon Corporation. Retrieved
August, 11, 2013.
Hirabayashi, K. (n.d). How do expectancies for success and values influence motivation? How
do we influence and assess expectancies and values? Retrieved from
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109217, August 20, 2016.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

196
Hirbayashi, K. (n.d.) How do we identify organizational influences on performance? Retrieved
from https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109259, March 26, 2017.
Hirabayashi, K. (n.d). How does self-efficacy influence motivation? How do we influence and
assess self-efficacy? Retrieved from
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109217, August 17, 2016.
Hobbs, L. (2012). Examining the aesthetic dimensions of teaching: Relationships between
teacher knowledge, identity and passion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(5), 718.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.01.010
Houser, M. L., & Waldbuesser, C. (2016). Emotional Contagion in the Classroom: The Impact
of Teacher Satisfaction and Confirmation on Perceptions of Student Nonverbal
Classroom Behavior. College Teaching, 1-8.
Iqbal, A., Aziz, F., Farooqi, T. K., & Ali, S. (2016). Relationship between Teachers’ Job
Satisfaction and Students’ Academic Performance.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Kezar, A. (2001). Research-based principles of change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 113–123.
Khan, A., & Pearce, G. (2015). A study into the effects of a board game on flow in
undergraduate business students. The International Journal of Management Education,
13(3), 193-201.
Killion, J. (2013). Establishing Time for Professional Learning. Learning Forward.
Kipps-Vaughan, D. (2013). Supporting teachers through stress management. The Education
Digest, 79(1), 43.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

197
Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction:
Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of educational Psychology,
102(3), 741.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student
engagement and achievement. Journal of school health, 74(7), 262-273.
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/, September 20, 2016.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41,212–218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Chapter 4, pp. 66–68.
Kushman, J. W. (1992). The organizational dynamics of teacher workplace commitment: A
study of urban elementary and middle schools. Educational administration quarterly,
28(1), 5-42.
Larrivee, B. (2012). Cultivating teacher renewal: Guarding against stress and burnout. R&L
Education.
Lauman, J. M. (2011). Why do learning communities develop in some elementary schools and
not in others? A study of selected elementary schools in Greater Vancouver British
Columbia (Doctoral dissertation, Education: Faculty of Education).
Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-
centered learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 64(4), 707-734.
Le Fevre, D. M. (2014). Barriers to implementing pedagogical change: The role of teachers'
perceptions of risk. Teaching and teacher education, 38, 56-64.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

198
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational
conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational Administration,
38(2), 112-129.
Lim, N., Haddad, A., & Daugherty, L. (2013). Implementation of the DoD Diversity and
Inclusion Strategic Plan: A framework for change through accountability (RAND
National Security Research Division report).
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision
making: A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational Management
Administration Leadership, 43(2), 269–289. doi: 10.1177/1741143214537229
Marshall III, R. P. (2013). Teacher Flow and its relationship to school mindfulness and enabling
school structure (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa).
Marzano, R. (2012). The Two Purposes of Teacher Evaluation. Educational Leadership, 70(3),
14-19.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayeaux, A. S. (2013). Motivating teachers towards expertise development: A mixed-methods
study of the relationships between school culture, internal factors, and state of flow.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change
the world. Penguin.
McGonigal, J. (2015). SuperBetter: A revolutionary approach to getting stronger, happier,
braver, and more resilient. Penguin.
McMillan, J. H. (2004). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (4th ed.). Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

199
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Modipane, M. m., & Themane, M. (2014). Teachers' social capital as a resource for curriculum
development: lessons learnt in the implementation of a Child-Friendly Schools program.
South African Journal Of Education, 34(4), 1-8.
Moè, A. (2016). Harmonious passion and its relationship with teacher well-being. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 59, 431-437.
Moller, S., Stearns, E., Mickelson, R. A., Bottia, M. C., & Banerjee, N. (2014). Is Academic
Engagement the Panacea for Achievement in Mathematics across Racial/Ethnic Groups?
Assessing the Role of Teacher Culture. Social Forces, 92(4), 1513-1544
Morrison, E., & Milliken, F. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and
development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725.
International School of Latin America (pseudonym) (2016). Accreditation report.
National Survey of Student Engagement. (2014) About NSSE. Retrieved from
http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/about.cfm, March 13, 2016.
Neto, R. D. C. A., Rodrigues, V. P., & Panzer, S. (2017). Exploring the relationship between
entrepreneurial behavior and teachers' job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education,
63, 254-262.
Nudell, H. (2005). Time to experiment: The role of exploration in professional development.
Learning & Leading with Technology, 32(4), 50-53.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/, August 28, 2016.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

200
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.
doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
The Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-866.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Voices inside schools. Harvard educational review, 72(2), 230-254.
Rodgers, C. R., & Raider-Roth, M. B. (2006). Presence in teaching. Teachers and Teaching:
theory and practice, 12(3), 265-287.
Rodríguez-Sánchez, A., Salanova, M., Cifre, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2011). When good is good:
A virtuous circle of self-efficacy and flow at work among teachers. Revista de Psicología
Social, 26(3), 427-441.
Romano, J. L., & Wahlstrom, K. (2000). Professional stress and well-being of K-12 teachers in
alternative educational settings: a leadership agenda. International Journal of Leadership
in Education, 3(2), 121-135.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Schechter, C. (2010). Learning from Success as Leverage for a Professional Learning
Community: Exploring an Alternative Perspective of School Improvement Process.
Teachers College Record, 112(1), 182-224.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

201
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/, October 4,
2016.
Seli, H. (n.d.) What is metacognition, and what strategies promote metacognition? Retrieved
from https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109205, October 20, 2016.
Seligman, M. E. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being.
Simon and Schuster.
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction (pp. 279-
298). Springer Netherlands.
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7–23.
Senge, P. M. (2014). The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning
organization. Crown Business.
Sicart, M. (2014). Play matters. MIT Press.
Simbula, S., & Guglielmi, D. (2010). Depersonalization or cynicism, efficacy or inefficacy: what
are the dimensions of teacher burnout? European journal of psychology of education,
25(3), 301-314.
Sisask, M., Värnik, P., Värnik, A., Apter, A., Balazs, J., Balint, M., & Feldman, D. (2014).
Teacher satisfaction with school and psychological well-being affects their readiness to
help children with mental health problems. Health Education Journal, 73(4), 382-393.
Slayton, J. (n.d.) The Role of the Interactive Conceptual Framework, Retrieved from
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=115144, March 25, 2017.
Stearns, E., Banerjee, N., Moler, S., & Mickelson, R. A. (2015). Collective pedagogical teacher
culture and teacher satisfaction. Teachers College Record, 117(8).
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

202
Tochon, F., & Munby, H. (1993). Novice and expert teachers' time epistemology: A wave
function from didactics to pedagogy. Teaching and teacher education, 9(2), 205-218.
Tuckman, B. (2006). Operant conditioning. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/
reference/ article/operant-conditioning/, September 27, 2016.
Van Leeuwen, L., & Westwood, D. (2008). Adult play, psychology and design. Digital
Creativity, 19(3), 153-161.
Whitton, N., & Moseley, A. (2014). Deconstructing Engagement Rethinking Involvement in
Learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(4-5), 433-449.
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. ASCD.
Yim, J. S. C., & Moses, P. (2016). Work factors and teacher satisfaction: The mediating effect of
cynicism toward educational change. Issues in Educational Research, 26(4), 694-709.
Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier26/yim.html
Yin, H., Huang, S., & Wang, W. (2016). Work environment characteristics and teacher well-
being: the mediation of emotion regulation strategies. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 13(9), 907.
Zhao, H. M. (2015). Study on the Task-Based Teaching of College English on the Basis of
Constructivism Theory.
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes,
student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research.
Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981-1015.
Zwart, R. C., Korthagen, F. A., & Attema-Noordewier, S. (2015). A strength-based approach to
teacher professional development. Professional development in education, 41(3), 579-
596.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

203
Appendix A
Survey Protocol

(approximately 20 minutes for respondents to complete / aproximadamente 20 minutos para que
los encuestados lo completen)

Demographic information/ Información demográfica:

Gender / Género: M, F
Section of the school / Sección del colegio: EC, ES, MS, HS
Grade level / Nivel de grado: Pre-k, K, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Content Area / Área de contenido:
Self-contained (all content areas) / Autónomo (todas las áreas de contenido)
Math,
Language Arts,
Lenguaje,
Social Studies,
Estudios Sociales,
Technology,
Science,
Physical Education,
Applied Arts,
Learning Support Services
Language I teach in / Lenguaje en que yo enseño: español, English
Leadership capacities/ Capacidades de liderazgo:
Not currently holding a leadership position in the school / Actualmente no ocupo una
posición de: liderazgo en el colegio
grade level coordinator/ coordinador de grado,
curriculum liaison / enlace del plan de estudios
other type of teacher leader / otro tipo de liderazgo de maestro.
Hiring classification / Clasificación de contratación: local or overseas/ extranjero
Number of years teaching / Número de años enseñando: 1-2 years; 3-5 years; 6-10 years; 11-
19 years; and 20+ years.
Number of years teaching at our school / Número de años enseñando en el nuetro colegio:
1-2 years/ años; 3-5 years/ años; 6-10 years/ años; 11-19 years/ años; and 20+ years/ años
Level of Education / Nivel de educación: Bachelors / Licenciatura, Masters/ Maestría,
Doctoral/ Doctorado
Certifications/ Certificaciones: please list all / por favor liste todas

Please rate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements (5 point scale:
Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral (Neither Agree nor Disagree), Agree, Strongly Agree):

1. I know what is expected of me as a professional at our school. / Sé lo que se espera de
mi como profesional en nuestro colegio.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

204
2. My colleagues know what is expected of them as professionals at our school. / Mis
colegas saben lo que se espera de ellos como profesionales en nuestro colegio.
3. I can articulate clear individual professional goals. / Puedo articular objetivos
profesionales individuales claros.
4. My team can articulate clear collective professional goals. / Mi equipo puede articular
objetivos profesionales individuales claros.
5. My teaching plans are created based on student interests. / Mis planes de enseñanza
se crean en base a los intereses de los estudiantes.
6. I solicit student ideas to inform what we are going to learn about. / Solicito ideas de
los estudiantes para informar sobre qué estaremos aprendiendo.
7. I am able to abandon my plans if during the course of a unit students want or need to
go a different direction or learn about a different topic that emerges from our
discussions or questions. / Puedo abandonar mis planes si durante el curso de una
unidad los alumnos quieren o necesitan ir en una dirección diferente o aprender sobre
un tema diferente que emerge de nuestras discusiones o preguntas.
8. I make my teaching plans based on what skills students need to learn this year. / Hago
mis planes de enseñanza basados en las habilidades que los estudiantes necesitan
aprender este año.
9. I can still address the standards in my curriculum if I allow my students to choose
what they want to learn about. / Todavía puedo seguir los estándares de mi currículo
si permito que mis estudiantes escojan lo que quieren aprender.
10. Teachers need to know the answers to questions they pose in the classroom. / Los
maestros necesitan saber las respuestas a las preguntas que plantean en el salón.
11. Encouraging students to ask open-ended questions is important. / Animar a los
estudiantes a hacer preguntas abiertas es importante.
12. Teachers need to come up with the questions that guide student learning. / Los
maestros deben plantear las preguntas que guían el aprendizaje de los estudiantes.
13. Providing time for students to work together is a priority for me. / Proporcionar
tiempo para que los estudiantes trabajen juntos es una prioridad para mí.
14. I mostly assess my students using quizzes and tests. / En la mayoría de los casos,
evalúo a mis alumnos usando pruebas y exámenes.
15. My students set their own goals. / Mis estudiantes establecen sus propios objetivos.
16. My students evaluate their own work. / Mis estudiantes evalúan su propio trabajo.
17. When students are involved in research or projects, they often learn incorrect
knowledge and facts. / Cuando estudiantes participan en investigación o proyectos,
suelen aprender conocimientos y hechos incorrectos.
18. I encourage my students to help me modify the classroom environment based on their
understanding of their learning needs. / Animo a mis estudiantes a ayudarme a
modificar el ambiente de la clase en base a la comprensión de sus necesidades de
aprendizaje.
19. It is important to teach facts so that students have background knowledge. / Es
importante enseñar hechos para que sus estudiantes tengan conocimiento previo.
20. To help me assess my students’ needs, I like to see what my students can do or
perform independently. / Para ayudarme a evaluar las necesidades de mis estudiantes,
me gustaría ver lo que mis estudiantes pueden hacer o desempeñar
independientemente.
21. I generally use a teacher’s guide to help me guide class discussions. / Generalmente,
uso la guía de un maestro para ayudarme a guiar discusiones de clase.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

205
22. My students spend a majority of their class time working independently. / Mis
estudiantes pasan la mayoría de su tiempo de clase trabajando independientemente.
23. I develop the “rules” or expectations for our class and my students are expected to
follow them. / Desarrollo las “reglas” o expectativas para nuestra clase y se espera
que estudiantes las sigan.
24. My students need a quiet classroom to learn best. / Mis estudiantes necesitan una
clase en silencio para aprender mejor.
25. Students need to have opportunities to be self-directed. / Los estudiantes deben tener
oportunidades para ser auto dirigidos.
26. Students should reflect on their learning. / Los estudiantes deberían reflexionar en su
aprendizaje.
27. Students should be able to learn at their own pace. / Los estudiantes deberían ser
capaces de aprender a su propio ritmo.
28. I would describe our school as a student-centered learning environment. / Describiría
el our school como un ambiente de aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante.
29. I know strategies associated with student-centered learning. / Conozco estrategias
asociadas con el aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante.
30. I incorporate strategies with student-centered learning into my teaching day. /
Incorporo estrategias con el aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante a mi enseñanza de
cada día.
31. I can identify many models of student-centered learning across my grade level. /
Puedo identificar muchos modelos de aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante a través
de mi nivel de grado.
32. I can identify many models of student-centered learning across my section. / Puedo
identificar muchos modelos de aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante a través de mi
sección.
33. I can identify many models of student-centered learning across the entire school, P-
12. / Puedo identificar muchos modelos de aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante a
través de todo el colegio, P-12.
34. Someone in my network of support helps me identify where I am implementing
student-centered learning practices vs. teacher-centered learning practices. Alguien en
mi red de apoyo me ayuda a identificar en dónde estoy implementando las prácticas
de aprendizaje centradas en el estudiante vs. las prácticas de aprendizaje centradas en
el maestro.
35. In my career or training, someone has made me aware of the emotional demands of
the teaching profession. / En mi carrera de formación, alguien me ha hecho
consciente de las exigencias emocionales de la profesión docente.
36. I have been made aware of the unique emotional demands of teaching at our school. /
Me han hecho consciente de las exigencias emocionales únicas de la enseñanza en
nuestro colegio.
37. I know the impact of my well-being on my effectiveness as a teacher. / Sé el impacto
de mi bienestar en mi efectividad como profesor.
38. I am aware of the elements of my state of mind (i.e. your mood or mental state) when
I am deeply engaged in my teaching. / Estoy al tanto de los elementos de mi estado
mental (es decir, su estado de ánimo o estado mental) cuando estoy profundamente
comprometido en mi enseñanza.
39. I know how to regulate my emotional states./ Sé cómo regular mis estados
emocionales.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

206
40. I am aware of the areas in my teaching where I am thriving. / Soy consciente de las
áreas de mi enseñanza donde estoy prosperando.
41. I regularly engage in deep reflection on the elements of my teaching practice. /
Regularmente, me comprometo en reflexión profunda en los elementos de nuestras
prácticas colectivas.
42. My team regularly engages in deep reflection on the elements of our collective
practices. / Mi equipo regularmente realiza una profunda reflexión sobre los
elementos de nuestras prácticas colectivas.
43. I think team communication about student-centered learning is important. / Creo que
la comunicación del equipo sobre el aprendizaje centrado en el estudiante es
importante.
44. I am a member of a strong professional community. / Soy miembro de una
comunidad profesional fuerte.
45. Teacher collaborations are valued at our school. / Las colaboraciones de maestros son
valiosas en el nuestro colegio.
46. I think it is important for teachers across our community to connect with each other in
different ways. / Creo que es importante que los maestros de nuestra comunidad se
conecten entre sí de diferentes maneras.
47. I am part of a collective culture where teachers work together to articulate (talk about)
successes. / Soy parte de una cultura colectiva donde los maestros trabajan juntos para
articular (hablar sobre) los éxitos.
48. I am part of a collective culture where teachers work together to celebrate (be
honored for or come together to commemorate or praise) successes. / Soy parte de
una cultura colectiva en donde los maestros trabajan juntos para celebrar (ser honrado
o reunirse para conmemorar o alabar) los éxitos.
49. I feel encouraged by someone in our school to develop my content expertise. / Me
siento alentado por alguien en nuestra escuela para desarrollar mi experiencia en el
contenido.
50. My team acknowledges my previous professional experience as I develop as a
teacher. / Mi equipo reconoce mi experiencia profesional anterior mientras me
desarrollo como profesor.
51. I engage with my colleagues around a shared vision for student learning. / Me
comprometo con mis colegas en torno a una visión compartida para el aprendizaje de
los estudiantes.
52. I trust my colleagues. / Confío en mis colegas.
53. My colleagues trust me. / Mis colegas confían en mí.
54. My colleagues appreciate me. / Mis colegas me aprecian.
55. My colleagues regularly show their appreciation of me. / Mis colegas regularmente
muestran su apreciación por mí.
56. My work relationships support ongoing learning and active engagement with my
teaching craft. / Mis relaciones de trabajo apoyan el aprendizaje continuo y el
compromiso activo con mi oficio docente.
57. I have received recognition when I engage in leadership opportunities. / He recibido
reconocimiento cuando hago actividades de liderazgo.
58. I am encouraged and empowered to model engagement for my students. / Me animan
y empoderan para modelar el compromiso para mis estudiantes.
59. I feel connected to a common P-12 purpose at the school. / Me siento conectado a un
propósito común P-12 en el colegio.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

207
60. I know strategies that improve team communication. / Conozco estrategias que
mejoran la comunicación de equipo.

Please rate the following about the phenomenon of Flow (4-point scale: Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly Disagree):

Flow is a phenomenon when someone feels intensely engaged and focused. In this state of
deep engagement, a person feels a loss of sense of time, and all their actions and awareness
would merge. In describing Teacher Flow, we might say that teachers feel appropriately
challenged, set goals and receive regular useful feedback, can take risks in their
environment, and feel both intrinsically motivated and rewarded. / El Flujo es un fenómeno
cuando alguien se siente intensamente comprometido y enfocado. En este estado de
compromiso profundo, una persona siente una pérdida del sentido del tiempo, y todas sus
acciones y consciencia se fusionarán. Al describir el Flujo de Maestros, podríamos decir
que los maestros se sienten adecuadamente desafiados, establecen metas y reciben
retroalimentación útil regular, pueden asumir riesgos en su ambiente y sentirse
intrínsecamente motivados y recompensados.

1. I receive support in achieving such a state as an individual. / Recibo apoyo para lograr tal
estado como individuo.
2. We receive support in achieving such a state as a team. / Recibimos apoyo para lograr tal
estado como un equipo.

Please rate the following based on your comfort level (4 point scale: Strongly Disagree,
Disagree, Agree, Strongly Disagree): Por favor califique lo siguiente basado en su nivel de
comodidad (escala de 4 puntos: Totalmente en desacuerdo, en desacuerdo, de acuerdo,
totalmente de acuerdo):

1. I feel comfortable having a conversation with my colleagues when we are talking about
something we might disagree about. / Me siento cómodo teniendo una conversación con
mis colegas cuando estamos hablando de algo sobre lo que no estamos de acuerdo.
2. Conflict is uncomfortable for me. / El conflicto es incómodo para mí.
3. I feel comfortable presenting an idea that is contrary to what my colleagues are saying. /
Me siento cómodo presentando una idea contraria a lo que mis colegas están diciendo.
4. I feel comfortable disagreeing with a peer. / Me siento cómodo estando en desacuerdo
con un compañero.
5. I feel comfortable disagreeing with an administrator. / Me siento cómodo estando en
desacuerdo con un administrador.
6. I feel comfortable bringing a new idea to my team that is different than anything we have
done in the past. / Me siento cómodo trayendo una nueva idea a mi equipo que es
diferente a todo que hemos hecho en el pasado.
7. I feel comfortable bringing a new idea to my administrator that is different than anything
we have done in the past. / Me siento cómodo trayendo una nueva idea a mi
administrador que es diferente a todo lo que hemos hecho en el pasado.
8. I feel comfortable telling my colleagues that I don’t know or understand something. / Me
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

208
siento cómodo diciéndole a mis colegas que no sé o no entiendo algo.
9. I feel comfortable telling my administrator that I don’t know or understand something. /
Me siento cómodo diciendo a mi administrador que no sé o no entiendo algo.

10. Please select all of the following that you believe to be true (check all that apply)/ Por
favor seleccione lo siguiente que cree que es cierto (marque todas las que apliquen)

• I have enough time in my day to do the teaching I need to do. / Tengo suficiente tiempo
en mi día para hacer la enseñanza que necesito hacer.
• I have enough time to take care of all my extra responsibilities. / Tengo suficiente tiempo
para cuidar de todas mis responsabilidades adicionales.
• I have enough time with my students. / Tengo suficiente tiempo con mis estudiantes.
• I have enough time to meet with my team. / Tengo suficiente tiempo para reunirme con
mi equipo.
• I have enough time to work with people who are in a different grade level or subject area.
/ Tengo suficiente tiempo para trabajar con persoISLA que están en diferente nivel de
grado o área temática.
• I have enough time to work across grade levels. / Tengo suficiente tiempo para trabajar
en todos los niveles de grado.
• I have enough time to work across sections and get to know what is going on across the
other sections in the school. / Tengo suficiente tiempo para trabajar a través de secciones
y saber lo que está pasando en otras secciones colegio.
• I have enough time to meet with my administrator. / Tengo suficiente tiempo para
reunirme con mi administrador.
• I have time to explore ideas or projects that are of personal interest to me. / Tengo tiempo
para explorar ideas o proyectos que sean de interés personal para mí,
• I have some autonomous time in my schedule. / Tengo un tiempo autónomo en mi
horario.

Please rate the following in relation to your experience as a professional at our school (6-point
Scale: Never, Rarely, Seldom, Sometimes, Often, Always) /
Por favor califique lo siguiente en relación con su experiencia como profesional en nuestro
colegio (Escala de 6 puntos: Nunca, Raramente, Rara vez, A veces, A menudo, Siempre)

1. I am deeply engaged at work. / Estoy profundamente comprometido en el trabajo.
2. I experience personal satisfaction on the job. / Experimento satisfacción personal en el
trabajo.
3. I am deeply engaged with my own goal setting process. / Estoy profundamente
comprometido con mi propio proceso de establecimiento de metas.
4. I have a high degree of individual confidence in meeting my goals. / Tengo un alto grado
de confianza individual en el cumplimiento de mis metas.
5. I experience a sense that time is lost, or goes by very quickly. / Experimento una
sensación de que el tiempo se pierde, o pasa muy rápidamente.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

209
6. I feel that my skills and level of challenge are appropriately balanced. / Siento que mis
habilidades y nivel de desafío están adecuadamente equilibradas.
7. I have a high degree of confidence in my team being able to collectively meet student-
centered goals. / Tengo un alto grado de confianza en que mi equipo pueda alcanzar
colectivamente las metas centradas en el estudiante.
8. I have opportunities to have meaningful conversations about teaching and learning with
my colleagues. / Tengo la oportunidad de tener conversaciones significativas sobre la
enseñanza y el aprendizaje con mis colegas.
9. I have opportunities to engage with my colleagues about ideas or in conversations that
might “rub me the wrong way,” but we grow and respect each other more from the
experience. Tengo la oportunidad de relacionarme con mis colegas sobre ideas o
conversaciones que podrían “guiarme en el camino equivocado,” pero crecemos y nos
respetamos más de la experiencia.
10. I have opportunities to engage with the leaders in our school about ideas or in
conversations that might “rub me the wrong way,” but we grow and respect each other
more from the experience. / Tengo la oportunidad de relacionarme con los líderes de
nuestra escuela acerca de ideas o conversaciones que podrían “guiarme en el camino
equivocado,” pero crecemos y nos respetamos más de la experiencia.
11. I have opportunities to engage in challenges that adequately balance my skills. / Tengo la
oportunidad de participar en desafíos que equilibren adecuadamente mis habilidades.
12. I have opportunities to engage in tasks that encourage risk-taking and spontaneity. /
Tengo la oportunidad de participar en tareas que fomentan la toma de riesgos y la
espontaneidad.
13. I have opportunities to engage in on-going activities that help me management my stress
levels. / Tengo oportunidades de participar en actividades en curso que me ayudan a
gestionar mis niveles de estrés.
14. I have opportunities to address any cynicism I have about any changes that are being
undertaken in the school. / Tengo la oportunidad de abordar cualquier cinismo que tenga
sobre los cambios que se están llevando a cabo en el colegio.
15. I have opportunity to take ownership of my own well-being within the regular school
day. / Tengo la oportunidad de tomar posesión de mi propio bienestar dentro del día
escolar regular.
16. I have opportunities to focus on teaching and learning successes. / Tengo la oportunidad
de concentrarme en los éxitos de enseñanza y aprendizaje.
17. I have opportunities to explore something I am passionate about as a regular part of my
work day. / Tengo la oportunidad de explorar algo que me apasiona como una parte
regular de mi día de trabajo.
18. I have opportunities to create new knowledge as part of my job. / Tengo oportunidades de
crear nuevos conocimientos como parte de mi trabajo.
19. I have opportunities to develop leadership capacity that promotes coaching and
community building, if I want it. / Tengo oportunidades de desarrollar la capacidad de
liderazgo que promueve el entrenamiento y la construcción de la comunidad, si lo quiero.
20. I receive relevant feedback, from either a colleague, my team, or my administrator. /
Recibo comentarios relevantes, ya sea de un colega, mi equipo o mi administrador.
21. I have time in my schedule that allows me to explore new learnings as part of the
professional development program. / Tengo tiempo en mi horario que me permite
explorar nuevos aprendizajes como parte del programa de desarrollo profesional.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

210
22. I feel the structure of my schedule supports me in implementing student-centered learning
strategies into my daily activities. / Siento que la estructura de mi programa me apoya en
la implementación de estrategias de aprendizaje centradas en los estudiantes en mis
actividades diarias.
23. I have an opportunity to engage in playful interactions or games as part of my work. /
Tengo la oportunidad de participar en interacciones lúdicas o juegos como parte de mi
trabajo.
24. My induction to the school was or has been coordinated with my on-going professional
development. / Mi inducción en el colegio fue o ha sido coordinada con mi desarrollo
profesional en curso.
25. My team wants me to be successful. / Mi equipo quiere que tenga éxito.
26. I am encouraged to have fun on the job. / Me anima a divertirme en el trabajo.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

211
Appendix B
Focus Group Protocol
Welcome
Thank you again for your valuable time to meet with me today. This focus group should
take approximately 1 hour to conduct. Please feel free to enjoy some food and drink while we
talk.
Before we get started with any questions, I would like to provide you with an overview of
my study and answer any questions you might have about participating:
I am currently enrolled as a doctoral student at the University of Southern California in
Los Angeles, California. I am studying Organizational Change and Leadership. As part of my
requirements for fulfilling a doctoral degree I am conducting a study exploring professional
development for teachers in P-12 student-centered learning environments. The study also
explores what schools can do to support the phenomenon of Teacher Flow within the
professional development program. I am conducting what is called an Innovation study, which
means I am exploring the resources necessary in implementing P-12 PD for student-centered
learning, so I am not evaluating performance of what is already in place.
Before we begin, I want to assure you of my role here today. Again, my questions are not
intended to be at all evaluative. I will not make any judgments on your performance or role in the
school program. Also, I commit to keep all the data collected here in strict confidence. I also ask
that you commit, as a focus group member, to do the same.
You all have received information about the study. Do you have any questions or need
any clarification about the study before we get started?
Follow-up after any questions: If there are no other questions or clarifications needed,
may I have your permission to begin the interview? As we discussed in our initial
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

212
communication, I will be recording our conversation to accurately capture what you share with
me. May I please collect your signed forms for consent to record now? (Recording will be a
requirement of participation in the focus group).
Since we are working together across a large institution and many grade levels and subject
areas, I am hoping we could start with a round of sharing what each of your roles are in the
school.
Transition into Body of Interview: Thank you everyone.
Now, as we begin together and get into the focus group, the fun part, I will just give you a
quick overview of the structure of our time together. I am going to pose some questions, and I
would like to encourage you all to just have a conversation with each other, build on each other’s
ideas, feel free to agree or disagree with each other as is appropriate, and offer as many different
ideas to the questions as you think are appropriate. There are no right or wrong answers and the
goal of bringing everyone together is to hear as many different points of view as possible.
Body of the Interview
1. To begin, please talk about professional expectations at the school.
o How do you know these are the expectations?
2. At this school, in our mission and our documentation, we use language that we are a
“student-centered learning environment.” Tell me a little bit about your understanding of
the expectation of student-centered learning at this school.
3. Please discuss different types of communication you receive or have received in the past
related to student-centered learning at the school.
4. Please talk about what you believe to be the difference between student-centered and
teacher-centered learning. Follow-up: As you think about these different strategies in
teaching and learning, please discuss different times or situations when you think one
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

213
method might be more appropriate than the other.
5. Please speak about goal setting at the school. How confident do you feel with the process
of goal setting?
6. Let’s talk about professional development at the school, how engaged do you feel in the
process? As an individual? As teams?
7. Describe your degree of comfort in creating a student-centered learning environment.
8. And you are all on a grade level or curricular team. Please describe your team’s comfort
in creating a student-centered learning environment.
9. Please talk a little bit about anything you feel motivates your work towards student-
centered learning. Probe: How might specific policies, structures, or procedures at the
school affect those motivations?
10. Discuss a time you felt an especially high degree of engagement with your teaching.
11. What barriers might exist that hinder you from having that experience?
12. Please speak to the ways in which you have felt appropriately challenged in a way that
supported your deep engagement in your teaching craft? Or with your students?
13. What supports do you think could be put in place that would help you in achieving this
level of engagement?
14. What types of internal or external rewards do you receive at school?
15. Where are your rewards coming from? And why do you feel like you are receiving them?
16. In describing this state of flow, this state of deep, intense engagement with your teaching
craft, what is it that you think you might need to support your achievement of such a
state?
17. In what ways do you think that your passions are allowed to be explored, developed, and
shared at the school?
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

214
18. If you or a colleague needed support for implementation of a student-centered learning
environment, where might you/they turn?
19. If you wanted to access mentors or models of student-centered learning in the school,
where might you start looking? How would you access them?
20. What supports or structures might the school be able to put in place that could further
support your implementation of a student-centered learning environment?
21. How does time factor in to your implementation of student-centered learning into your
daily activities?
Possible Probing Questions: You mentioned ______. Can you help me understand that a little
more? Could you please tell me what you meant when you said ______? Does anyone have a
different experience?
Final Thoughts: I am wondering if there is anything that you would add to our conversation
today that I might not have covered.
Closing: Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with me today. What you have share
here today is very helpful in my study and I greatly appreciate your time and openness with me.

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

215
Appendix C

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 90089
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

NURTURING TEACHER FLOW:
AN INNOVATION STUDY ADDRESSING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN A P-12
STUDENT-CENTERED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Ginger Carlson, candidate for
Doctorate of Education in Organizational Change and Leadership under Dr. Eugenia Mora-Flores
at the University of Southern California, because you are (insert eligibility criteria). Your
participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask questions about
anything you do not understand, before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time
as you need to read the consent form. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this
form. You will be given a copy of this form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this innovation study is to identify the resources necessary to implement a
comprehensive P-12 professional development program that ensures implementation of student-
centered teaching and learning strategies into daily activities, while also best supporting the
achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. The researcher in this study will be looking at
what knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources are necessary to influence teacher
engagement in professional development in the school.

STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to join a small focus group and
take part in a focus group interview for a one-time period of approximately two hours. The focus
group will explore questions related to knowledge, motivation, and organization about student-
centered vs. teacher-centered learning, communication, well-being, reflection, time, and
engagement. The focus group participants will be randomly selected (such as your name being
drawn from a hat) from the categories of overseas-hired teachers, locally-hired teachers, and
teacher leaders. Each focus group will be audio recorded. Should you choose to not have our
conversation recorded, please inform the researcher.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no foreseen risks to your participation in this study. You may only be inconvenienced
by the time it takes to participate.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

216
This study anticipates direct benefit to the organization and the field of education as a result of
your participation. This study anticipates that the professional development at the school will be
greatly enriched, translating to greater teacher and student engagement. The study also anticipates
this study to inform the ways in which the organization can continue to grow in order to positively
affect faculty retention rates. As this is a research study, the benefits are contingent upon the
results.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will not be compensated for your participation; however, release time to attend the meeting
and snacks will be provided for you.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. The members of the research
team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
The data will be coded with a false name or pseudonym; identifiable information will be kept
separately from your responses.
The data will be stored on password-protected computers and held for three years after the study
has been completed and then destroyed. Recorded audio files will be destroyed immediately
upon transcription.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies
to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and
discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies
because of your participation in this research study.

INVESTIGATOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Ginger Carlson
Phone: +502-4012-0998
Email: glcarlso@usc.edu

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

217
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My
questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study. I have
been given a copy of this form.

AUDIO

□ I agree to be audio-recorded.

□ I do not want to be audio-recorded.

Name of Participant

Signature of Participant Date

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I believe that
he/she understands the information described in this document and freely consents to participate.

Name of Person Obtaining Consent

Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

218
Appendix D

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

NURTURING TEACHER FLOW:
AN INNOVATION STUDY ADDRESSING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN A P-12
STUDENT-CENTERED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this innovation study is to identify the resources necessary to implement a
comprehensive P-12 professional development program that ensures implementation of student-
centered teaching and learning strategies into daily activities, while also best supporting the
achievement of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. The researcher in this study will be looking at
what knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources are necessary to influence teacher
engagement in professional development in the school.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT

Your participation is voluntary. Your relationship with USC and/or your school/district will not
be affected, whether or not you participate in this study.
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to complete an online survey which is
anticipated to take about 20 minutes. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to;
click “next” or “N/A” in the survey to move to the next question.

You may also be invited to participate in focus group as a concurrent phase of the study. If you
choose to participate in one of the focus groups, you will be asked to be part of a 2-hour small
group audio-taped interview. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to; if you
don’t want to be taped, handwritten notes will be taken.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

219
You will not be compensated for your participation.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and
will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. The members of the research
team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection
Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
The data will be coded with a false name or pseudonym; identifiable information will be kept
separately from your responses.
The data will be stored on password-protected computers and held for three years after the study
has been completed and then destroyed. Recorded audio files will be destroyed immediately
upon transcription.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies
to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator: Ginger Carlson
Phone: +502-4012-0998
Email: glcarlso@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

220
Appendix E
Blended Evaluation Tool

Thank you for your recent attendance in the ISLA Student-centered Learning
Professional Development Workshop. Please provide your responses to this short survey about
the training so that we may understand your experience and provide us helpful information about
what supported or hindered your learning. Your response provides important information as we
work as a school community to improve our overall professional learning and education
experience for our students. Thank you for lending your voice to the process!

Survey Items (four-point Likert scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree)

Level One: Reactions
Engagement
1. The course improved my understanding of student-centered learning strategies.
2. I felt engaged in the workshop.
Relevance
3. I feel the information gained in last month’s workshop has been relevant to my daily
work with students.
Satisfaction
4. The workshop was a valuable use of my time.

Level Two: Learning
5. The workshop increased my knowledge about common language about student-centered
learning.
6. The workshop increased my knowledge about strategies for student-centered learning.
7. The workshop increased my knowledge about the benefits of student-centered learning.
8. The workshop helped me understand how to implement new student-centered learning
strategies.
CREATING CONDITIONS FOR TEACHER FLOW

221
9. The course increased my knowledge about the benefits of student-centered learning.
10. The workshop helped me understand the importance of reflecting about the
implementation of student-centered learning strategies.
11. After the training, I feel more confident about my ability to implement student-centered
learning strategies with my students.
Level Three: Behavior
12. My use of student-centered learning strategies has increased since attending the
workshop.
13. I have used one or more of the strategies from the workshop with my students.
14. I have referred to the job aid to support the application of the strategies with my students.
Level Four: Results
1. I have made progress on my goals since attending the workshop.
2. I feel more competent in using student-centered learning strategies since attending the
workshop.
3. My team is using common language about student-centered learning.
Open Ended Response:
I feel the next workshop afternoon could be improved by:

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study applies a combination of learning, motivational, organizational, and change theories and the utilization of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to understand support for schools implementing a student-centered learning paradigm. The purpose of this project was to identify the resources necessary in the design of a comprehensive P-12 professional development program that ensures implementation of student-centered teaching and learning strategies into daily activities, while also best supporting deep teacher engagement, defined here through the lens of the phenomenon of Teacher Flow. With an embedded mixed methods design, this study layers quantitative and qualitative data within a larger phenomenological research design. The data includes surveys from 89 faculty members and three focus groups from an American-International school in Latin America. This project finds notable areas to address in teacher professional development, especially in the domains of conceptual knowledge of student-centered learning, collective efficacy, value, and organizational influences. Based on the findings in conjunction with a literature review, this project recommends an educational model to systematically provide a framework for student-centered learning.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis

PDF

An evaluation study: quality contextual professional development

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

Labor displacement: a gap analysis an evaluation study addressing professional development in a small business environment

PDF

The knowledge, skills, motivation and organizational factors that teachers need to support African American boys in public preschool: an evaluation study

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development

PDF

A case study of promising practices mentoring K-12 chief technology officers

PDF

Educator professional development for technology in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Application of professional learning outcomes into the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Key leverage points for improving educational outcomes of black male students: Response to intervention as an effective strategy to support students in general education: An evaluation study

PDF

Factors that promote or inhibit a teacher’s ability to identify and refer students with anxiety or depression for evaluation

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Practices supporting newcomer students

PDF

The impact of professional learning community on teacher learning and student achievement: a qualitative approach

PDF

Developing a culture of teacher collaboration in middle school

PDF

Professional development at an international school

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model

Asset Metadata

Creator Carlson, Ginger L. (author)

Core Title Creating conditions for Teacher Flow: supporting student-centered learning through design of optimal P-12 professional development

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 02/14/2018

Defense Date 01/18/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag flow theory,OAI-PMH Harvest,P-12 education,professional development,student-centered learning,Teacher Flow

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee chair), Baca, Reynaldo (committee member), Freking, Federick (committee member)

Creator Email glcarlso@usc.edu,iginger@hotmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-475481

Unique identifier UC11266307

Identifier etd-CarlsonGin-6038.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-475481 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CarlsonGin-6038.pdf

Dmrecord 475481

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Carlson, Ginger L.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA