Recognizing that standardized instructional treatments may not be equally effective across contexts, a growing number of scholars are arguing that the strategy of adopting packaged programs and striving to implement them faithfully is neither realistic nor desirable. An alternative view is that scaling up educational treatments requires balancing program fidelity with program adaptation (McDonald, Keesler, Kauffman, & Schneider, 2006; McLaughlin, 1990; US Department of Health and Human Services, 2002). In other words, programs may have the best chance of improving educational outcomes at scale if the "core components" of the program are kept intact, while practitioners at particular sites adapt the intervention so as to make it more compatible with their context. This approach has been described as "context-focused approach to scale-up," which recognizes that "proven" approaches must be implemented with a combination of fidelity and flexibility (McDonald et al., 2006). Much remains to be learned about how contrasting program structures that encourage program adherence versus adaptation interact with the characteristics of teachers and school contexts to affect teacher learning and instructional practice. It may be possible to maximize intervention-related teacher learning, and subsequently incorporation of intervention techniques, by matching the intervention approach with the teacher's current capacity. This study sought to understand whether different intervention management approaches (fidelity versus adaptive) are differentially effective for teachers with varying levels of experience with the intervention. Specifically, data is used from a cluster-randomized trial of READS, a summer literacy intervention for elementary school students, to address the following questions: (1) Does intervention management approach affect teachers' intervention-related learning; Does the effect of the approach on teacher learning differ depending on the past intervention experience of the teachers and overall experience level of the implementation team; (2) Do teachers under contrasting intervention management approaches find different types of learning experiences to be more helpful; Do these effects differ by teachers' past intervention experience; (3) Does intervention management approach affect teachers' incorporation of intervention techniques into their regular classroom practice; and Do effects differ depending on teachers' past experience with the intervention and overall experience level of the implementation team? A central question in education research is how to scale up educational interventions. Some scholars have advocated that schools adopt proven programs and implement them with fidelity. Others have argued that schools must adapt programs for their context. Although these analyses are limited by the self-report nature of the outcomes, the results suggest the answer to the question of which program management approach is best may depend on the circumstances. Tables and figures are appended. [SREE documents are structured abstracts of SREE conference symposium, panel, and paper or poster submissions.]