Transcript The `positive classroom` - Centre for Evidence Based Early Intervention

‘POSITIVE CLASSROOMS, POSITIVE CHILDREN’
Evaluating the Incredible Years Teacher
Classroom Management programme in Ireland
Dr Sinead McGilloway
Principal Investigator
Mental Health and Social
Research Unit
Department of Psychology
NUI Maynooth
Overview
 The Incredible Years Ireland Study: our role and who we are
 Study background:
- EBD in the classroom
- research objectives/questions
- study design
 Outline of key findings
 Conclusion
The research evaluation:
Our role
 To undertake a 4-year national community-based evaluation
of the Incredible Years programme in Ireland:
- Parent (BASIC) training
- Teacher Classroom Management training**
- Combined parent and small group (Dina) training
 To work collaboratively with Archways and other communitybased organisations and schools in executing the research
 To generate high quality findings that will impact on policy and
practice in Ireland (and elsewhere) -> improve the lives of
children with EBD and their families
The Research Team
NUI Maynooth

Church of Ireland
College of Education
Dr Anne Lodge

Bangor University, Wales
Dr Tracey Bywater

Trinity College Dublin
Prof Catherine Comiskey

Queen’s University Belfast
Dr Michael Donnelly
 Dr Sinead McGilloway
 Lynda Hyland
 Dr Grainne NiMhaille
 Yvonne Leckey
 Paul Kelly
 Prof Donal O’Neill
 Mairead Furlong
EBD in the classroom
 Child conduct problems in school
academic underachievement, poor attendance and early school leaving
poor mental health, juvenile delinquency
 Impact on the teacher’s ability to teach the class effectively
 Negative impact on classroom environment and the
teacher-child relationship
 Can affect teacher job satisfaction, stress and likelihood of
burnout
 DES survey (2006): 32% of trainee teachers had fair or
ineffective classroom management skills
The Incredible Years TCM
programme




Social and behavioural learning principles
Help teachers promote pro-social behaviour
Reduce undesirable and aggressive behaviour
Establish more positive relationships with pupils and
facilitate peer-to-peer bonding
 Encourage teachers to collaborate with parents and
promote parent involvement in school
(Webster-Stratton, 2005)
 The intervention
 A brief group-based programme
 Five one-day sessions (each month)
 Videotape modelling, role plays and discussions
Research questions
1.
Does the IY TCM programme improve classroom
management competencies and provide skills to better
manage challenging behaviour?
2.
To what extent does the TCM programme improve child
behaviour in the classroom?
3.
How do outcomes for teachers and children change over time?
4.
What are the experiences of teachers and which factors
facilitate or inhibit the effective implementation of the
programme?
5.
How cost-effective is the programme?
Research Design

Three separate studies:
1. Main study: A clustered Randomised Control Trial
(RCT) design (intervention and control group)
2. A smaller qualitative study assessing experiences and
views of teachers who took part in the RCT
3. A cost analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of the
programme
Method
1. RCT
 22 teachers from 11 schools in Limerick area (445 children aged
4-7yrs from Junior and Senior Infant classes; 53% female)
- Child behaviour (teacher & researcher-completed)
- Teacher behaviour and self-report
 Initial screening low’, ‘medium’ and ‘high’ EBD (n=217)
 Assessed at baseline (pre-intervention) and 6 months later
2. Qualitative sub-study
 1:1 interviews with 11 teachers from 6 schools (baseline and 6mth follow-up only)
 Thematic analysis
3. Cost analysis
 Detailed cost data on: (1) non-recurrent initial training costs of
facilitators; (2) pre-delivery cost of programme; (3) group training
costs; and (4) teacher substitution costs
outcome data
RCT Flow Diagram
Schools (n=12) in the greater Limerick area approached by Archways to participate in the research
Nine schools provided informed consent
Three schools were unable to participate (reluctant to
participate [n=2] and time concerns [n=1])
Names of 2 other schools provided to the research team by
Archways. Both consented to participate
Total number of participating schools (n=11), teachers (n=22),
children (n=445)
All teachers completed and returned
questionnaire measures
234* index children were selected for observation from the initial
sample of 445 on the basis of their total SDQ scores
Randomisation process conducted;
11 intervention group teachers and 110 index children; 11 control
group teachers and 107 children
Baseline (T1) observations carried out in all classrooms (n=22)
with all teachers (n=22) and index children (217)
Intervention group teachers (n=11) receive TCM training
(110 Index children)
Follow-up (T2) assessments conducted immediately after TCM
training completed (ie. 6 months after baseline assessment).
* 17 children were lost to follow-up.
T-SDQ child scores computed and index children identified.
Parental informed consent obtained
Mean SDQ ‘Total Difficulties’
scores across the sample range
18
15.9 15.86
16
14
12
10
7.8
7.3
8
8.2
6.4
6
4
2
1.2
1.5
0
Low
Middle
Control
High
Treatment
Total
Key findings:
1. RCT
 Baseline: 26% of children showed significant social, emotional
and behavioural difficulties at baseline (SDQ)
 Several statistically significant improvements in pre-post
intervention teacher behaviour:
- use of fewer negative classroom management strategies
- give children more time to comply with questions/instructions
- positive upward trend in positive classrm management strategies
 Increase in the intervention group in self-reported frequency
of use and perceived usefulness of positive classroom
management strategies
 All teachers reporting feeling more confident in their ability to
manage conduct problems
Teacher ‘no opportunity’ for
Intervention and Control Groups
14
No Opportunity
12
10
8
Control
6
Intervention
4
2
0
Baseline
Follow-up
Child outcomes
 Children in intervention group:
- showed significant reductions in emotional symptoms
- positive trends with respect to overall behaviour
 Those most ‘at risk’ showed most significant
improvements:
- overall behaviour
- peer problems
- general distress and social impairment
SDQ Total Difficulties score for
‘high risk’ children
SDQ Total for high scorers
20
18
16
14
12
Control
10
Intervention
8
6
4
2
0
Baseline
Follow-up
2. Qualitative study (Lynda Hyland)
Theme 1: Reality of the classroom environment
 All teachers reported significant behavioural challenges in their
classrooms; some also reported physical and verbal aggression:
“…he has thrown things behind his head and hit children with them. And he has
even been violent towards adults as well too, children and adults… numerous
teachers I’d say at this stage have gotten kicked and punched when he lashes
out.” (T1)
 Teacher stress:
“Some days I went home and just cried, because I was just so exhausted and
frustrated with the situation. Because, you know, I could see it in the other
children, and I could see it in the other parents as well.” (T4)
 Reluctance to seek support
Theme 2: TCM learning experience
 Increased awareness: Course helped crystallise theoretical
knowledge into conscious practical applications in the classroom
 Experiential learning: A very positive aspect of the programme
“ I’m delighted that I went on the training. As I said overall, you’re a way more
confident teacher dealing with behaviour. You just have better and more
resources and different things to draw upon.” (T11)
 Role of the Group leaders: Building relationships and facilitating
learning
“… (The group leaders) were very, very good. They were very open and…
they’d ask and they would try their best - even give you ideas to try this or
that or try the other.” (T1)
 ‘I am not alone’: Social support and the learning process
Theme 4: Impact on child
behaviour - A ‘therapeutic milieu?’
A number of reported improvements in pupil behaviour:
 overall conduct
 staying more ‘on task’ - less distracted
 fewer attention-seeking behaviours
 better peer relations
“They would be encouraging each other. They have
started to get on better with each other and they’re cooperating amongst themselves even.” (T1)
“…for the children…,you know who were doing well and
who might often get overlooked, they were encouraged
and you know, they were boosted and their behaviour
improved as a result.” (T2)
Theme 5: The ‘positive classroom’
 Teachers reported having much more positive classroom experiences,
and seeing the classroom as a happy place to work and learn
 They reported feeling much less stressed and better equipped to deal
with situations when they arise:
“We’ve been having more and more really, really good days where
they’ve been enjoying it and I’ve been enjoying it. And you know, they
have been saying things like, ‘oh you should get a sticker too teacher’
…you were very good today’ and all this ‘kind of thing’. So I think it
helps me personally feel like I can cope with anything now.” (T7)
“ I think it’s good. I think it’s very good…I definitely would recommend
people to do it” (T3)
 All interviewees would highly recommend programme to another
teaacher/school
3. Cost Analysis (Prof.Donal O’Neill)
 Total cost of delivery: €22,012.92
 Average cost/teacher: €2012.92
 Average cost/child:
€100.65 (average class size=20)
 Approx 1% of total expenditure per primary school child
(Eurostat, 2007)
 Combined with outcome (SDQ) data -> €52.97 per 1
point change in SDQ scores (ICER); e.g. it would cost
approx €158.91 to bring the average highest scoring
child in sample to within ‘normal’ range of behaviour
 Much lower than other education-based interventions
($4863-$20,972 per child/youth)
Conclusion
heooThe good nTeh ews…
 Findings support those from elsewhere
 Significant improvements in key areas:
- Teacher skills/competencies in managing behavs
- Child behaviour
- Classroom atmosphere/ positive classroom envt
 Programme was regarded as being very worthwhile
 Other benefits: teacher stress, process of selfreflection, better home-school collaboration
 Very modest costs
 TCM programme is effective, cost-effective, highly
acceptable to teachers, well suited to an Irish context
and consistent with policy and practice guidance in
Ireland
Thanks to…
 All participating schools, their principals, teacher
participants
 The staff of Archways
 The Atlantic Philanthropies & Dormant Accounts fund
 The Expert Advisory Committee and Peer Reviewers
 All members of the research team and especially the
MHSRU team at NUI Maynooth
www.iyirelandstudy.ie
[email protected]