Key ingredients for successful change implementation in schools

Source: Humphrey, N., Boehnke, J. R., Santos, J., Melek Alemdar, Panayiotou, M., O’Brien, A., Burke, L., Hamilton, S., Qualter, P., Demkowicz, O., Lu, Y., & Thompson, A. (2025). The effect of a universal, school-based social and emotional learning intervention (passport: Skills for life) on internalizing symptoms and related outcomes during the transition from childhood to adolescence: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 117(7). https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000963

LEARN Brief and Infographic Credits: Dr. Marshall G. Jones

Overview: 

This article argues that the success of professional development depends not only on the quality of the training itself, but also on the school environment into which that learning is introduced. Drawing on focus-group data from 36 New Zealand teachers, the researchers found that teachers’ classroom implementation of new learning was shaped by five school-level conditions: leadership engagement and actions, the overall change environment, staff relationships, beliefs and attitudes toward change, and whether the school community was “on the same page.” In practical terms, the study shows that teachers are more likely to apply new practices when leaders provide sustained support, the pace of change is manageable, relationships are trusting, and staff understand and support the purpose of the change.

As research, the study is useful because it moves beyond the common question of whether professional development is well designed and instead examines why implementation often varies from school to school. Its qualitative design is a strength for an administrator audience because it captures the lived realities behind stalled implementation: change fatigue, lack of time, weak alignment, limited teacher voice, and inconsistent follow-through. The findings are especially relevant for schools introducing new learning environments or instructional models, because they suggest that buy-in, coherence, and organizational support are not “extras” but core conditions for successful change.

At the same time, the study has limits that should temper how broadly its findings are applied. It is based on a self-selected sample of teachers in one national context, and the authors acknowledge that teachers’ experiences in New Zealand may not fully transfer to other systems. The study also focuses on one segment of the improvement process—whether teachers implement new learning—rather than measuring student outcomes directly. Even so, its value lies in its practical specificity: it gives school and district leaders a clear framework for thinking about why promising initiatives succeed in some settings and stall in others.

Key Insights: 

•       Implementation depends on school conditions, not just the quality of the professional development. Teachers are more likely to use new learning from professional development when leadership support, staff relationships, coherence, and time are in place.
•       Teacher buy-in is essential to adoption. When teachers understand the purpose of a change, believe it is worthwhile, and feel included in the process, they are much more likely to implement it in practice.
•       Change spreads unevenly when schools are overloaded or misaligned. Competing initiatives, inconsistent leadership messages, and change fatigue can slow or weaken adoption, even when the professional development itself is strong. This aligns closely with diffusion and adoption theory. The study suggests that new practices are not adopted simply because they are introduced; they spread when the organizational context supports them, when influential leaders reinforce them, and when teachers see them as credible, manageable, and relevant.

Action Steps: When implementing new methods of professional development it is critical to ensure all faculty are on the same page when it comes to the goals and purpose of the changes. A foundation of trust that teachers and faculty are supported by their organization is more likely to ensure good outcomes. 

Full Study: https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2026-53332-001.html