Project Activities
The research team iteratively developed a model of professional development aimed at improving the behavioral and academic outcomes of children with or at risk for disabilities. During the development phase, the research team, in collaboration with a focus group of early childhood educators and administrators, developed the intervention content to support child learning and behavior, as well as the process components to support teacher learning of skills and implementation of ABC strategies with children in the classroom. The researchers collected data on coach, teacher, and child behaviors to evaluate the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of the intervention implemented by preschool teachers, as well as to identify factors associated with model implementation and sustainability. For the pilot study, the researchers implemented a single-case randomized nonconcurrent multiple-baseline intervention design across classrooms/teachers to evaluate teacher delivery of the intervention strategies.
Structured Abstract
Setting
For the iterative development phase, the research took place in a United Way early childhood program and pilot study research took place in a Head Start center, both located in a community with high poverty rates.
Sample
A focus group of consisting of teachers/assistants, center administrators, project staff, and consultants, and five teachers/teaching assistants working directly with coaches (research staff) participated in the development phase of the study. Although seven teachers/teaching assistants initially participated in the pilot study, due to pandemic closures, delays, and staff resignations, the final post-pandemic pilot study sample consisted of five teachers/teacher assistants across three Head Start classrooms. Each teacher identified at least two children with learning and/or behavior issues and one or two neurotypical children, leading to a total sample of 15 preschool children.
The intervention focused on high-quality teacher–child interactions and supports teachers need to effectively implement intervention strategies aimed at enhancing the academic and behavioral outcomes of children with or at risk for disabilities. The intervention had two main components: content and process. The content component was comprised of three types of supports (collectively referred to as ABC support strategies) for child learning through teacher–child interactions: (1) A: Affective supports (strategies for developing an affirmative/responsive relationship), (2) B: Behavioral supports (specific affirmations of children (knowledge, skills, feelings, behavior, persistence in learning, interactions with peers, positive learning attitude), and (3) C: Cognitive supports (expanding child language and strategies that help children develop higher-order thinking skills, such scaffolding). The process component was comprised of the ABC strategies that coaches used to support teachers to learn and implement these strategies in the classroom with fidelity. They paralleled the ABC supports linked to quality teacher–child interactions and focused on the coach–teacher interactions. Teachers were first trained on the content of each intervention strategy through direct instruction, coach modeling and role playing, video examples, and reflections. Depending on the teacher’s level of comfort with technology, the coach also assisted the teacher in implementing the strategy in the virtual classroom simulations. Real-time coaching in the classroom was implemented with SWIVL cameras and Bluetooth technology with a “bug-in-the-ear” approach to provide immediate support and feedback.
Research design and methods
In the initial phase, the research team used an iterative approach to developing intervention components through input from the focus group on the design, development, and refinement of iterations of the content, order, and implementation of the intervention strategies. For the pilot test, a single-case randomized nonconcurrent multiple-baseline intervention design across classrooms was implemented, based on: (a) random assignment of the classrooms to the staggered tiers of the design, with a between-classroom stagger for the first intervention strategy of between three and five sessions; and (b) random assignment of each classroom to one of two pre-selected potential intervention start points for the intervention sessions. The pilot test was disrupted by the impact of the pandemic, with additional data collection on some of the initial teachers/teaching assistants, as well as new participants, occurring after a long delay.
Control condition
In the pilot study, participants served as their own control through the use of a baseline phase within a single-case research design.
Key measures
Observational data were collected through video-recordings of all coach–teacher sessions (pre-sessions, real time coaching sessions, post-intervention sessions) using the Intervention Procedural Fidelity Checklist for Pre-Coaching Session, Coaching Session, and Post-Coaching Session, and teacher-child interaction sessions, with coding adapted from three coding manuals: KidTalk Code: Behavior and Language Coding Protocol, Teacher-Child Interaction Code, and Trainer Interaction Code. Through these observations, teacher outcome variables focused on the percentage of specific supports provided to children. Coaching outcome variables included fidelity of intervention and coaching strategies. Child outcome variables included data on specific child behaviors (child initiations and responses to peers, child requests, child responses to teachers) as well as child engagement, respectfulness, disruptiveness, and reactions. Pre and post teacher–child interactions were observed using the Individualized Classroom Assessment Scoring System (inCLASS).
Data analytic strategy
Single-case data were used to evaluate on a session-by-session basis the intervention effects on coach, teacher, and child variables using visual inspection (level, trend, variability, immediacy of effect, overlap) of graphed data, coupled with statistical analysis of intervention effects. Multiple-baseline randomization statistical tests were applied to each of the teacher/aide strategy measures (during immediate acquisition and delayed, as well as longer-term strategy maintenance). The analyses yielded significance probabilities and classroom effect-size estimates (both parametric and nonparametric) representing the magnitude of each strategy’s effectiveness. There was a disruption between pre- and post-pandemic implementation of the study that added complexity to the analyses for the teachers and thus precluded comprehensive analyses and interpretation of the child outcomes.
Key outcomes
The main findings of this project, as reported by the principal investigator, are as follows:
- Teachers Providing ABC Supports to Children
- For the behavioral strategy of specific affirmations, there were positive immediate, delayed, and longer-term impacts that produced increased implementation of the strategy with fidelity.
- For the cognitive strategies of expansions and scaffolding, there were positive immediate impacts of teacher use with fidelity. For these two strategies there were also positive delayed effects of implementation with fidelity.
- For the affective strategy of empathic responding, there were positive immediate impacts on teacher use with fidelity.
- Coach provision of parallel ABC supports were identified by teachers as most helpful in implementing the learned strategies in the classroom with fidelity; however, the components of each strategy needed to be individualized to each teacher’s learning style and culture.
- Due to interruptions and delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, training on all the intended ABC strategies and child outcome data could not be systematically analyzed.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Project contributors
Products and publications
ERIC Citations: Find available citations in ERIC for this award here.
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
