Concerns-Based Adoption Model

The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM), first articulated by Gene Hall and Susan Loucks in 1979, is a conceptual framework for understanding change in schools. It posits that in the process of experiencing change, people's questions or concerns change. As they answer one set of questions, new questions emerge. The questions tend to begin with informational and personal, such as “What is the change?” and “How will it affect me?” Once they are satisfied with those answers, their questions become more logistical: “What do I need to do?” “What materials will I need and how will I get them and manage them?” “Why is this taking so much time?” These questions arise before actual implementation of the change—or innovation. Once people start to engage in the change, their questions and concerns move to impact. In school settings these questions might include: “What is the effect on the students?” “How does this compare to what we were doing?” “Are there ways to improve it?”

Although science educators and instructional technology educators have used CBAM more than those in school health, it has applicability for managing the systemic changes required to implement a coordinated approach to school health. CBAM can help those managing changes such as a new health education course of study, a new schoolwide bullying prevention intervention, a major policy change such as incorporating physical activity into instruction, a new way of relating such as positive behavior supports, a new environmental practice such as integrated pest management, or a new service such as elementary school counselors. This model applies to anyone in the school system involved in a [Page 116]change, from policy makers, administrators, teachers, and school support staff to students and their parents.

The model identifies seven Stages of Concern. The stages with sample statements of concern for each are

• Level 0: Non-use—“I know nothing about this intervention and am doing nothing to learn about it.”
• Level 1: Informational—“I have heard about this intervention and would like to find out more about it.”
• Level 2: Personal—“What will I have to change to use this intervention?” “How comfortable am I with what I will need to do?” “Will this be an inconvenience or require a lot of extra time?”
• Level 3: Management—“I have made the commitment to use the intervention and am starting to implement it.” “I need to figure out what I am doing and how to use this.” “I need to obtain needed equipment and supplies and manage them.”
• Level 4: Consequence—“I am feeling more comfortable knowing what I am doing and I want to know what effect this is having on students.” “Are they responding positively or negatively?” “Are they improving academically?” “How does this compare to what we were doing?”
• Level 5: Collaboration—“Now that I am comfortable using this and have seen its positive effect on students, I want to share it with my colleagues.” “How can I relate what I am doing now to what others are doing?” “How will this change how I work with colleagues?”
• Level 6: Refocusing—“This intervention has become second nature and I truly understand how it works.” “I can see ways to use it in new ways or to modify it to be even better.”

Understanding these stages can help decision makers plan appropriate professional development and support systems. A single training event rarely results in successful implementation of a new intervention because attendees are not ready to learn all they will eventually need to know.

...