Overview: Results of Program-wide - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Overview:Results of Program-wideImplementation of the Pyramid ModelEvaluation

December 2016Julie Betchkal, CESA 11julieb@cesa11.k12.wi.us Lana Nenide, WI Alliance for Infant Mental Healthlnenide@wiaihm.org Dr. Christine Neddenriep, UW-Whitewaterneddenrc@uww.edu

Pyramid Model implementation of the framework:

4 levelsTraining (8 Part, PIWI, PSF)Training with community of practiceTraining with technical assistanceProgram wide implementationProgram-level outcomesTeacher-level outcomesChild-level outcomes

Levels of implementation chart

DATA

Fidelity is goal:Program levelClassroom levelChild levelPRACTICESPractice based coaching at the classroom level by expert internal to the program

SYSTEM/ CLIMATE

Critical elements implemented by a

program leadership team

Elements of program wide implementation

External coaching to support the program

Critical Program Elements1. Establish leadership team

2. Staff Buy-In3. Family Involvement4. Program-wide expectations5. Strategies for teaching expectations

6. All classrooms demonstrate adoption of “Teaching Pyramid”

7. Procedures for responding to challenging behavior

8. Staff Support Plan

9. Monitoring implementation and outcomes

SYSTEM/ CLIMATE

Critical elements implemented by a

program leadership team

12. Interventions for children with persistent challenging behavior (PCB)

13. Connecting with families (COM)14. Supporting Families in using Pyramid Model practices (INF)15. Strategies for responding to challenging behavior (SCB)Additional 17 red flag itemsSchedules, routines, and activities (SR)Transitions between activities (TR)

Supportive conversations (SC)

Promoting engagement (ENG)

Providing directions (PD)

Collaborative teaming (CT)

Teaching behavior expectations (TBE)

Teaching social skills and emotional competencies (TSC)

9. Teaching friendship skills (FR)

10. Teaching children to express emotions (TEE)

11. Teaching problem-solving (TPS)

80% of

121 total

indicators

Evidence based practices

Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool (TPOT)

PRACTICES

Practice

based

coaching

Coming soon: TPITOS

Using data to change behavior

DATAProgramClassroomChild

DATA

ProgramClassroomChild

Program-Wide Implementation Evaluation: Summary ConclusionsTeachers in the Pyramid Model Program-Wide Implementation classrooms employed significantly more evidence-based practices in the classroom than those in the comparison classrooms. These differences were consistent across time.

Students’ reported problem behaviors decreased more in the Program-Wide classrooms than the reported problem behaviors of students in the comparison classrooms.The most vulnerable students’ problem behaviors decreased more and their social skills increased more in the Pyramid Model classrooms than the reported behaviors of students in the comparison classrooms.All students in both groups of classrooms made moderate to strong progress across measures of early literacy.The most vulnerable students’ early comprehension skill increased more in the Pyramid Model classrooms than the early comprehension skill of students in the comparison classrooms.

Who Were the Participating Teachers?Number of Participants:

22 female teachers of 4-K classrooms10 Pyramid Model Program-Wide Implementation Classrooms12 Comparison ClassroomsLocation of Participants:Two larger cities in Central Wisconsin5 Pyramid Model Classrooms and 6 Comparison Classrooms in each cityType of Classroom:4 in Head Start Classrooms4 in Public School Buildings5 in Community Centers (e.g., Churches, YMCA)

9 in Child Care Centers

How Did They Differ?

Pyramid Model TeachersComparison TeachersAverage Percentage of Practices Implemented Fall (TPOT1)83.6

53.2***

Average Percentage of Practices Implemented Spring (TPOT

2

)

83.4

58.1***

Years Teaching in Early Childhood

8.3

7.3

Hours of Pyramid Model Training

36.1

13.1***

Hours of Pyramid Model Coaching

6.5

0.3*

* Significantly different at

p

< .05; **

p

< .01; *** Significantly different at p < .0005

Teachers in the Pyramid Model Program-Wide Implementation classrooms employed significantly more evidence-based practices in the classroom than those in the comparison classrooms. ***F (1, 20) = 27.19; p < 0.005, η

2 = .576

Who Were the Participating Students?Male

FemaleTotalPyramid Model282250Comparison312859Total

59

50

109

No significant differences in gender or age (Avg. Pyramid Age = 4.36; Avg. Comparison Age = 4.34).

Students’ reported problem behaviors decreased more in the Program-Wide classrooms than the reported problem behaviors of students in the comparison classrooms.*

Who Were the Most Vulnerable Participating Students? Male

FemaleTotalPyramid Model7310Comparison10313Total

17

6

23

More males than females overall. No significant differences in gender or age by group (Avg. Pyramid Age = 4.1; Avg. Comparison Age = 4.4).

The most vulnerable students’ problem behaviors decreased more in the Pyramid Model classrooms than the reported behaviors of students in the comparison classrooms.**

The most vulnerable students’ social skills increased more in the Pyramid Model classrooms than the reported skills of students in the comparison classrooms.*

Questions? Clarifications?