Project Activities
This study was completed in two phases. In the first phase, the researchers tested the original CARE model iteratively with two cohorts of 74 teachers to determine its feasibility and attractiveness to teachers. In the second phase of the project, the researchers completed a randomized controlled trial (CARE or wait-list control) with 50 teachers to determine the promise of CARE for improving teacher and student outcomes.
Structured Abstract
Setting
The research took place in an urban school district and a rural/suburban school district in central Pennsylvania.
Sample
Participants in the study were 124 teachers (74 in Phase I and 50 in Phase II) of kindergarten through fifth grade.
Intervention
The Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE) professional development model consists of monthly 2-day sessions of professional development focused on social-emotional awareness, and weekly 30- to 60-minute follow up distal coaching sessions during the school year. CARE is based upon the Prosocial Classroom mediational model that conceptualizes teachers' well-being and social-emotional competence as fostering supportive teacher-student relationships, effective classroom management skills, and instructional support, which in turn should lead to a healthy and prosocial classroom environment and positive social, emotional, and academic outcomes for students.
Research design and methods
This development project took place in two phases. In Phase I, three successive iterations of the intervention were piloted, evaluated, and refined over the course of one school year as an in-service training/professional development opportunity for 74 K–5 teachers. In Phase II, the final version of CARE was pilot tested with 50 K–5 teachers. At the end of the project a final intervention manual and materials, as well as measures of program fidelity and quality, were created in preparation for testing the initial efficacy of CARE.
Control condition
Teachers randomly assigned to the control condition were offered the opportunity to receive CARE training after the pilot RCT was completed.
Key measures
A variety of process measures and observational and self-report measures were used in Phase I, including the PANAS Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, the BDI Beck Depression Inventory, the MAAS Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale, the MBI Maslach Burnout Inventory (Educators' Survey), the Problems in Schools Questionnaire, the TSES Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale, and the Stressful Occurrences and Support Questionnaire. In Phase II, the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) was used to assess classrooms pre- and post-intervention.
Data analytic strategy
Qualitative process evaluation data was analyzed using interim analysis. Interview and focus group data was transcribed, segmented, and coded using a priori and inductive codes. Data was organized and summarized using a hierarchical and networked category system that explored teachers' impressions of program effectiveness. Quantitative data was analyzed using mixed-effects models with repeated measures (pre- and post-intervention) and changes in psychological variables were determined. Regression (partial correlation) analyses were performed to validate the Prosocial Classroom mediational model. Paired t-tests were used to examine change over time in the relevant constructs. Exploratory "dose-response" multiple regression analyses were done that related attendance at training sessions with amount of independent practice to the proximal outcomes. Finally, teachers' perception of the effectiveness of CARE was correlated with outcomes. For all self-report measures, comparisons between the CARE treatment group and control group were made during the post-intervention period using covariance adjusted means.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Products and publications
ERIC Citations: Find available citations in ERIC for this award here.
Book chapter
Jennings, P.A., and DeMauro, A.A. (2017). Individual-Level Interventions: Mindfulness-Based Approaches to Reducing Stress and Improving Performance Among Teachers. In T. McIntyre, S. McIntyre, and D. Francis, Educator Stress: Aligning Perspectives on Health, Safety and Well-Being (pp. 319-346). Springer, Cham.
Journal article, monograph, or newsletter
Jennings, P.A., Frank, J.L., Snowberg, K.E., Coccia, M A., and Greenberg, M.T. (2013). Improving Classroom Learning Environments by Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE): Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(4): 374-390.
Jennings, P.A., Snowberg, K.E., Coccia, M.A., and Greenberg, M.T. (2011). Improving Classroom Learning Environments by Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE): Results of Two Pilot Studies. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 46(1): 37-48.
Schussler, D.L., Jennings, P.A., Sharp, J.E., and Frank, J.L. (2016). Improving Teacher Awareness and Well-Being Through CARE: A Qualitative Analysis of the Underlying Mechanisms. Mindfulness, 7(1): 130-142.
Sharp, J.E., and Jennings. P.A. (2016). Strengthening Teacher Presence Through Mindfulness: What Educators Say About the Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE) Program. Mindfulness, 7(1): 209-218.
Related projects
Supplemental information
Co-Principal Investigator: Greenberg, Mark
Key Outcomes: The main features of the intervention and findings of the project's pilot RCT are as follows:
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
