Under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, states created statewide systems of support, in collaboration with existing agencies, to deliver targeted assistance to districts and schools identified as in need of support. With limited personnel and resources, state education agencies partnered with outside agents to address the needs of a growing number of low-performing schools. Support and services for low-performing schools were designed to increase opportunities for schools to meet academic content and achievement standards for all students. Strong outside agents (skilled in systems change, knowledge of interventions and capacity for relationship-building) have been shown to produce changes in low-performing schools, but the long-term effect of those changes is unclear. One barrier to the implementation of the statewide system of support, and to any useful evaluation of its impact, is the presence of vulnerable populations, such as students with disabilities. Because low-performing schools tend to have larger student populations identified with academic risk factors like disability status, understanding how the partnership between state education agencies and outside agents improves outcomes for students with disabilities, specifically, is essential in evaluating the overall impact of the statewide system of support. The purpose of this research is to examine how a mid-sized state’s implementation of the statewide system of support provision, as outlined in The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, by incorporating an existing regional training and technical assistance system, one focused specifically on improving special education, impacted instructional delivery for students with disabilities.

Mandates have been issued for educators to collaborate and improve student achievement, requiring a change in instructional practices through teacher talk. Teachers have struggled to make the transitional conversion from team planning to observed changes in instructional practices with evidence of improvement. The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine how teachers collaborated while following the Ohio Improvement Process. The purpose was then to make data-driven changes regarding instructional practices in the continuous improvement cycle. The conceptual framework was constructed from the teachers' dialogic stances towards talk of instruction, along with the intellectual and emotional attitudes teachers have about making changes. The guiding research question examined the ways teachers have been influenced by each other to make changes in instructional practices. The case study design observed a sample of 10 teachers from two teacher-based teams, with five of those teachers being interviewed. Observational data were examined for dialogic stance toward talk of instructional practices, whereas interview data were analyzed looking for evidence of the cognitive restructuring. Statements were categorized as motivations and influences. The analysis revealed that the teachers are changing their thinking through motivations and influences from collaboration. Literature has supported the findings that teachers could benefit from a gradual implementation process leading to the continuous improvement cycle. By developing a policy recommendation paper with a focus on teacher learning, positive social change may include preparing and empowering teachers for the changes that occur through collaboration.