Teacher Leadership:
An Appealing and Inescapable Force in School Reform?1
Introduction to the Report
Teacher Leadership is one of four background papers commissioned by the Commission on Mathematics
and Science Teaching for the 21st Century (aka The Glenn Commission). At the time of the paper’s
preparation (2000), its authors were co-directors of an NSF-funded study of models of teacher leadership
being used as scaling-up strategies by six projects of NSF’s Urban Systemic Initiatives program.
The goal of the NSF systemic projects was to improve student performance outcomes by developing and
institutionalizing fundamental changes in the nature of schooling. The change strategy that is the focus of
this paper is “to identify and deploy a corps of teacher leaders to provide support to their colleagues in
changing instructional practice.” Although the roles defined for teacher leaders vary greatly, two broad
roles are dominant, with the first being the more common.

The full-time “teacher on special assignment”. These teacher leaders are released from their
classrooms in order to support changes in classroom practices among a large number of
teachers in several schools.

The reduced-load teacher. These teacher leaders maintain some daily classroom teaching
responsibility, but are released part of each day to work with colleagues.
Whatever the role of teacher leaders, their extent of their effectiveness is enhanced when they are part of
a systemic district effort, “a coherent and focused set of district policies to address the substantive
challenges of reform.” The aim of this systemic approach to reform is “to create greater coherence in K12 mathematics and science programs within and across grades and … to reach all students in all
grades.”
Tasks for Teacher Leaders
The tasks assigned to teacher leaders in mathematics and science education are of four types.
1. In-classroom support of individual teachers. Tailored to the needs of each teacher, this type of
support includes demonstration teaching, team teaching, assistance in introducing a new
curriculum unit, providing needed materials, and giving feedback on the teacher’s efforts to
implement a new curriculum. The latter work often employs a demonstrate-debrief-observedebrief intervention strategy.
2. Professional development activities for groups of teachers. Teacher leaders may staff institutes
offered at times when teachers are not teaching, conduct workshop follow-up in classrooms, or
lead on-going workshops during the school year. This type of professional development typically
focuses on new curriculum, unfamiliar science or mathematics content, or innovative instruction
and assessment strategies.
3. Indirect support to several classrooms. In this case, the work of teacher leaders is directed to
tasks that indirectly affect many classrooms. It includes service on standards and curriculum
committees, working with community groups to secure needed resources, managing resource
inventories (e.g., science materials banks), and improving school/district communication.
4. Crisis management. Here the teacher leader is called upon to respond to whatever, whenever.
The whatevers include responding to the need for a substitute teacher, taking on the teacherevaluation work of an administrator, dealing with student disciplinary problems, or moving
materials from one building to another.
Teacher Leadership: An Appealing and Inescapable Force in School Reform?
Page 1 of 2
Challenges Faced by the Teacher-leader Strategy
Recent reductions in central office staff, especially in the core content areas, has led districts to turn to
their experienced teachers to make up a deficit in content-based expertise and experience in leading
large-scale reform. Specifically, teacher leaders are being asked to confront the problems of (a) reaching
all of the district’s science and mathematics teachers with necessary reform-supporting services, (b)
persuading skeptical or resistant teachers to participate in the reform effort, and (c) sustaining reform
efforts beyond initial funding and initial professional development activities. Research shows that districts
that turn to teacher leaders to solve these problems must be prepared to address several issues related
to the strategy.
1. Separating teacher leaders from their classrooms and their colleagues. The leaders’ credibility is
based upon their effectiveness in the classroom; their new role separates them from practicing
what they promote. Removed from the classroom “rank and file,” leaders also are separated from
other teachers by being recognized for exceptional performance in an egalitarian profession.
2. Leadership training and support. Leaders demonstrated skill in working with students does not
guarantee skill in working with other teachers or in assuming a new relationship with school
administrators. Training is required to conduct new kinds of activities (e.g., content-based
workshops or curriculum development work at grade levels outside a leader’s personal teaching
experience). Leaders also need training in non-classroom issues such as assessment and
accountability.
3. Hidden costs of leaving the classroom. The persons sought after as full-time teacher leaders
often are reluctant to abandon the classroom; those that do soon may feel a diminution of
classroom expertise and professional credibility. Teacher leaders on a “reduced-teaching
assignment” find that they really are doing two full-time jobs. In either case, principals are
reluctant to lose the classroom services of their best teachers.
4. New forms of job stress for teacher leaders. Colleagues resistant to proposed changes –
especially changes with short timelines – may see the leaders as intrusive rather than supportive.
If changes are not clearly articulated as district policy or if school administrators are not
informed/supportive of the changes, the work of leaders will be neither accepted nor appreciated.
5. Unconfirmed effectiveness of the teacher-leader strategy. Despite districts’ efforts to track the
work of teacher leaders, the effectiveness of teacher leadership is not well documented.
Anecdotal evidence of changes in teachers’ practices is mixed. There is evidence of positive
outcomes “when teacher leadership is part of an entire district infrastructure for mathematics
and/or science education reform.” Reforming a districts education infrastructure means attending
to the development of a coherent K-12 curriculum and a related system of student assessment,
providing professional development linked to that curriculum, and an accountability system that
applies to all teachers and all administrators.
About the Publisher
Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC) is a nonprofit organization founded in 1958. Its goal is
“building bridges among research, policy, and practice.” It manages over 300 projects in 50 countries
with work extending to early child development, K-12 education, health promotion, workforce preparation,
community development, learning technologies, basic and adult education, institutional reform, medical
ethics, and social justice. EDC is “committed to education that builds knowledge and skill, makes
possible a deeper understanding of the world, and engages learners as active, problem-solving
participants.” EDC headquarters are located at 55 Chapel Street, Newton, MA 02458-1060.
TEL: 617-969-7100. FAX: 617-969-5979. WEB: http://www.edc.org
1Lord,
B. & Miller, B. (2000). Teacher leadership: An appealing and inescapable force in school reform? Newton, MA: Education
Development Center, Inc. www.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn/LordMiller.doc
This summary was prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers. It is offered to business, education, and policy leaders
who are interested in the systemic improvement of mathematics and science education. The intent of the summary is to provide a
brief introduction to the full report; it does not critique the report’s assumptions, methods, or conclusions. Readers are encouraged
to consult the full document for further information.
Teacher Leadership: An Appealing and Inescapable Force in School Reform?
Page 2 of 2