Misinterpreting Marzano

We have often discussed the "trends" in the field and the implications of those "trends" in higher education and research study. But, how does new research affect our K-12 schools? Marzano has been a buzz word in the K12 world for a few years now. And, as research-based instruction has become increasingly important as it is now mandated and thus, has been tied to the budget, state and district officials have called for research-based instruction to be implemented in their schools. As an educator, I see how research-based instruction has the ability to positively affect our students if implemented correctly. In case you missed it, the operative words there were "implemented correctly." If not implemented correctly, the research-based instruction has the ability not only have a negative affect on student learning, but could adversely affect teachers and the way that they teach. For example, the district that I was working for last year mandated that teachers use Marzano's strategies. It wasn't that they wanted us to used research-based instruction, it was that they really didn't show us how. They constantly threw buzz words at us like "instructional goals," "cues," "advance organizers," and "non-linguistic representation" in faculty meetings and development workshops. They told us what these things were, but they gave no indication of how they should be implemented in our classrooms. And, on top of that they gave us ultimatums for not implementing the strategies in our classrooms such as, "Teachers may receive letters in their files if objectives are not visible when administrators enter the classroom." Though this is only one example, the ultimatums put pressure on teachers to use strategies they were not comfortable with and did not fully understand. Therefore, many teachers used the strategies, but in inappropriate and ineffective ways.
Merrill does a good job in chapter 7 of breaking down his principles of instruction, but as I was reading through the chapter, I kept coming back to the problems that the teachers faced last year. We would constantly say, "How can we use this in our own classrooms?" I think that implementing this type of instruction is feasible, but also extremely problematic for subject matter teachers because some subjects lend themselves better to implementing these strategies. I know we are not expected to use every strategy in every lesson, but I think more work needs to be done so that teachers can use these strategies in specific contexts. Moreover, failure to implement theses strategies is directly related to higher-ups who are not well-read in the research. It should be the responsibility of those mandating the use of these strategies to not only fully understand them, but to aid in the transition and implementation process.
I do agree with Merrill, however, the field seems both limiting and extensive. There are many theories and strategies, but a lack of foundation. I, too, hope with the maturation of the instructional design, that the principles can give us the foundation we need for models and prescriptions to come.