Transcript Training Pre

Training and Supporting Teachers to
Implement Effective Classroom
Management Practices
Teri Lewis-Palmer
Emma Martin
University of Oregon
Collaborators
Tary Tobin
 Wendy Reinke
 Shanna Millen
 Kira Florence
 Nandita Rao
 Sarah Fairbanks

Educational Outcomes for
Students with EBD

Generally attain unfavorable educational
outcomes
(US Department of Ed, 2001; Walker, et al., 1999)
– About 50% drop out of school
– Earn lower grades, truancy, fail classes
– Unsuccessfully employed, poor work
records
– Early onset of problem behavior and low
academic engagement can lead to
identification of EBD and placement in
special education
Key Features of Effective
Instruction
 The
presentation of multiple
opportunities to respond
 High
rates of student correct
academic responding
 The
delivery of praise to students
when they are exhibiting appropriate
academic behaviors
Student-Teacher Interactions

Students with or at-risk for EBD
frequently engage in behaviors that
impact teacher-student interactions
(Gunter, et al., 1993; Sutherland, 2002)

Teachers may inadvertently contribute to
problem behavior
(Carr, Taylor, & Robinson, 1991; Gunter, et al., 1993)

Teachers spend less academic time with
students
(Nelson & Roberts, 2000; Stein & Davis, 2000; Sutherland, Wehby, & Yoder, 2002)
Monitoring Teacher Behaviors

Self-management for teachers has
produced temporary increases in the use
of effective instruction strategies
(Gunter, Reffel, et al., 2002; Sutherland, Alder, & Gunter, 2002; Sutherland & Wehby,
2001)

Performance feedback used for
temporarily increasing staff/teacher
behavior
(Mortenson & Witt, 1998; Noell, et al., 1997; Noell, et al., 2000, Sutherland, Wehby, &
Copeland, 2000; Witt, Noell, LaFleur, & Mortenson, 1997)
Performance Feedback

Provides information and knowledge of
processes and results in an effort to
promote transfer or maintenance of skills
and behaviors
(Arco, 1991; Fleming & Sulzer-Azarpff. 1989; Mortenson & Will, 1998)

Results in more consistent intervention
effects
(Green & Rein, 1991; Harchiik et al., 1992)
Context & Background

Real-time analysis of student social
behavior

Direct performance feedback

Focus on pre-service and inservice
teacher behaviors shown to improve
student outcomes
Dependent Variables

Student variables
– Disruptive behavior
– Academic engagement
– Correct academic responses

Teacher variables
– Praise
– Reprimands
– Opportunities to respond
Inservice:
Participants and Design
CCU
Four general
education classrooms
(grades 2, 4, and 5)


Multiple baseline
across classrooms

Multiple baseline
across students

Teachers primary
participants

Students primary
participants



PAR
Four general
education classrooms
(grades 2, 4, and 5)
Classroom Check-up (CCU)
Components of the Classroom Check-Up
Step 1: Assess Classroom
• Teacher Interview
• Classroom ecology Checklist
• Classroom Interaction Observation
• Classroom Academic Engagement
Step 2: Feedback
• Consultant provides feedback on assessment findings.
• Feedback includes both protective and risk factors identified
Step 3: Menu of Options
• Teacher and Consultant collaboratively develop a menu of options for
intervening to create positive classroom outcomes
Step 4: Choose Intervention(s)
• Teacher chooses any number of interventions to implement.
• Consultant provides ongoing support in the implementation of the
intervention(s).
Step 1: Assess Classroom

Teacher Interview
•
•
•

Build rapport
Strengths and weaknesses
Identify areas of concern
Classroom Observations
•
MOOSES: real-time data collection
Step 2: Feedback

Summarize observations
•
•


Identify areas of strength
Identify areas of weakness
Meet with classroom teacher
Provide both visual and verbal
feedback
CCU Feedback
Opportunities to
Respond
Student Accuracy
Student
Engagement
Step 3: Menu of Options

During Feedback Session identify
potential interventions
•
•

Potential interventions are guided by
consultant’s knowledge of research
Interventions build upon teacher strengths
Write down all potential interventions
•
Menu of interventions to choose from
Step 4: Choose an Intervention


Complete Menu of Interventions
Identify one or two interventions from
menu
•

•
Teacher will prioritize need
Intervention tailored to teachers needs
Develop plan with teacher for
implementation

Guide evaluation of treatment integrity
General v. Specific Praise
S pec ific P rai s e
General Prais e
100%
80%
% of
P raise
60%
40%
20%
0%
P re 1 P ost 1F-up 1 P re 2 P ost 2F-up 2 P re 3 P ost 3F-up 3 P re 4 P ost 4F-up 4
Teachers
Praise & Disruptive Behavior
CCU
Baseline
Pr ais e
Classroom 1
Visual Performance Feedback
Self-monit oring
Dis ruptions
Selfmonitoring
6
5
1 month
Follow-up
4
3
2
1
0
-1
Classroom 2
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
# per Minute
-1
Classroom 3
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
Classroom 4
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33 35
Days
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
67
Positive Academic Responding
(PAR)

Initial training
1) Trainer discussed strategies with teacher
2) Trainer modeled how to use the strategies
3) Teacher demonstrated how s/he will use strategies
4) Trainer prompted teacher during instruction and
post conference if necessary

Self-monitoring training
1) Teachers given a reminder colored card & visual
prompt
2) Teachers completed daily self-evaluation form
3) Teachers watched videotape of instruction and
completed the graphing forms with trainer completed once per week
Goal = 7.0 OTR’s/min (80% of recommended rate),
0.4 rate of praise for target student
Performance feedback

Trainer met with teachers once per week
to provide performance feedback on
student and teacher behavior

Self-monitoring forms were reviewed
(teacher rates of effective instruction
strategies), performance graphs shared,
strategies for increasing rates discussed
Rate Per Minute of
Overall Rate of Classroom Praise
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
2
3
Teachers
4
Percent of Correct Academic Responses for Baseline
and Post Intervention
Percent of Correct Academic
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1A
1B
2
3A
Target Students
3B
4
Rate Per Minute of
Reprimands
Rates of Reprimands For Target Students During
Baseline and Post Intervention
Baseline
Post intervention
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
1
2
3
Teachers
4
Rate Per Minute of Reprimands
Rate of Overall Reprim ands for Baseline and Post
Intervention
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
1
2
3
Teachers
4
Preservice: Pilot Procedures
(Elementary SpEd students)

Receive training and instruction to interpret realtime analysis graphs

Presented with real-time analysis graphs and
ongoing graphs of their instructional behaviors

Set goals based on real-time data and ongoing
performance data

Progress is monitored through direct observations
OTR
CAR
Behaviors
of
Interest
(frequency)
Word
Attack
Story
Reading
Praise
Context
Feedback
Reprimand
(duration)
Workbook
Other
Weekly Feedback Reports
Please Review the following data for week 8 (5/18/05) and complete the data decision making worksheet.
Remember to share your goals with your supervisor when s/he visits this week. If you have any
questions, please contact Emma.
OTR 111(6/min.)
CAR 91 (82%)
FB 12
PR 44
RP 0
Observation Totals
Real-Time Analysis Graph
(Most Recent Observation)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
OTR
CAR
D
5/ ate
2/
2
5/ 005
5/
5/ 20
1 6 05
/
5/ 200
18 5
/2
00
5
Number of O pportunities
& Responses
Opportunities to Respond & Correct Academic
Responses
Graphs of Ongoing Performance
Date
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
PR
FB
D
5/ ate
2/
20
5/ 05
5/
5/ 200
16 5
/
5/ 200
18 5
/2
00
5
Number of Praise & Feedback
Statements
Praise & Feedback
Date
Other
Workbook
Story
Reading
Word Attack
Reprimand
Praise
Corrective
Feedback
No Corrective
Feedback
Feedback
Correct
Academic
Response
Opportunity
To Respond
Time in Seconds
Decision-Making Worksheet
Opportunities to
Respond
Percent of Correct
Academic Responses
Feedback
Praise:Reprimand
Oral Reading Fluency
Percent Correct Academic
Responses across Participants
Percent of Correct Academic Responses acorss
Participants during Performance Feedback
Percent Correct Academic
Responses
100
90
80
70
60
85%
Criterion
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
Observations
4
5
Case Studies: Fluency &
Maintenance
Percent of Correct Academic Responses acorss
Participants during Performance Feedback
Maintenance
Percent Correct Academic
Responses
100
90
80
70
60
85%
Criterion
50
Fuencybuilding
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
Observations
4
5
Fluency & Maintenance:
Opportunities to Respond
Opportunities to Respond
Opportunities to Respond
300
250
200
Fluency
150
Maintenance
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
Observation
Did I establish/maintain a rate of 160 to 200 opportunities to
respond over a 20 minute observation?
Fluency & Maintenance:
Correct Academic Responses
Percent Correct Academic Responses
Percent Correct Academic
Responses
100
90
80
70
60
Fluency
50
Maintenance
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
Observation
Did I establish/maintain a rate of 85% of better?
5
Fluency & Maintenance:
Feedback
Feedback
250
Feedback
200
150
Fluency
100
Maintenance
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
Observation
Did I provide immediate corrective feedback when student errors
occurred?
Conclusion

Brief intervention plus feedback produced
changes in teacher and student behavior
 Future research:
– Effective and efficient feedback
• Type and intensity of support
• Fading
• Sustainability of effects
– Systems within the school
– Teacher training
• Pre-service training
• New teacher support
Implications

Teacher preparation programs
– Changes in supervision for pre-service
teachers
– Impact on student outcomes

Administrative feedback
– Changes to performance feedback
provided to in-service teachers
Next Steps

2005 – 2006 Academic Year
– Randomized Control Trial
– Maintenance
– Generalization

pbis.org