T PTO

CHAPTER 6

Using the Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool to

Support Implementation of Effective Practices: Case Studies

As described in Chapter 1, the TPOT can be used for a variety of purposes, including as a tool to help inform professional development. Coaching is emerging as an evidence-based professional development practice for supporting teachers’ use of teaching and instructional practices such as those included on the TPOT (Fox, Hemmeter, Snyder, Binder, & Clarke, 2011; Hemmeter, Snyder, Fox, & Algina, 2011, Powell & Diamond, 2013; Snyder et al., 2011). Practice-based coaching is one approach to coaching that has promising evidence (National Center on Quality Teaching and Learning, 2013). A key component of practice-based coaching is the use of needs assessment instruments and associated processes to identify areas of strengths for teachers as well as areas of need related to a specified set of practices. The data from needs assessments can then be used to identify and clarify goals for coaching and to inform the development of action plans. Practices reflected on the TPOT can be used as part of needs assessment processes. TPOT data can be used to identify action plan goals, monitor progress toward action plan goals, and evaluate the effects of coaching on teachers’ implementation of Pyramid Model practices. In this chapter, we present two case studies that demonstrate how the TPOT can be used to inform the design, delivery, and evaluation of professional development related to implementation of Pyramid Model practices. The first case study illustrates how the TPOT could be used when coaching an individual teacher. The second case study describes the use of the TPOT at the program-wide level to identify professional development needs and then to plan and monitor professional development activities using a data-based decision-making framework.

ELLEN: USING THE TPOT TO PROVIDE IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT TO A TEACHER THROUGH COACHING-BASED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Ellen is the lead teacher in a state-funded, public preschool classroom. She has been teaching in the public preschool program for 4 years and has a bachelor’s degree in child development. Ellen was eager to become an early educator and is motivated to teach because of her love of young children. She finds teaching to be stressful, however. In the past several years, major changes have occurred in the state-funded prekindergarten program, with increased emphasis on early learning standards and the addition of a state-mandated annual child assessment.

Ellen’s classroom includes 15 children from 3 to 5 years of age. Of these children, two children are dual-language learners (one speaks Spanish and the other speaks Haitian Creole), and three children have identified disabilities. She has a full-time teaching assistant and the support of a consulting early childhood special education teacher who provides some in-classroom assistance (about 3–5 hours a week) for the children with disabilities. Ellen feels fortunate to have the assistance of her other team members and describes their relationship and ability to work together as strong. Ellen learned about the Pyramid Model through workshops that were offered in her community. She attended a 1-day workshop offered by her school district that provided an overview of the model and associated practices. She was excited about implementing practices to promote social skills and address the behavioral challenges that were occurring in her classroom. After returning to her classroom from the workshops, she was not sure how to begin implementing Pyramid Model practices. She quickly became immersed in the daily demands of her classroom and never really got started. The following year, her school district offered additional workshops about the Pyramid Model and associated practices as well as implementation support from a coach. A series of 2-hour workshops was offered on early-release days over the course of the school year.

Ellen recalled her initial excitement about the promise of the Pyramid Model and indicated to the district her interest in being part of the professional development. She was intrigued about having the support of a classroom coach, although she was a little worried that coaching sessions might feel uncomfortable or she would not like having someone in her classroom who would be observing and judging her teaching. She attended a district meeting where more information about the workshop series and coaching were described. Her fears about coaching were alleviated when she learned that her coach would not be in an evaluative position and that the coaching process would be driven by her needs and goals related to implementation of Pyramid Model practices.

The initial activities that occurred after her enrollment in the Pyramid Model professional development were to meet her classroom coach and sign a coaching agreement. The coaching agreement included information on coaching activities and more details about the role of the coach and the teacher in the process. Ellen liked that the coach was enthusiastic about her classroom, listened with empathy when Ellen described many of her challenges with teaching, including dealing with children’s behavior challenges, and conveyed a willingness to help Ellen with Pyramid Model practice implementation.

Once the coaching agreement was signed and Ellen received the schedule of upcoming workshops, Ellen and her coach selected a day for the initial TPOT administration that would occur in her classroom after the first workshop. The first workshop that Ellen attended included an overview of the Pyramid Model and a self-assessment to allow teachers to identify their needs and goals related to Pyramid Model practices. The practices included on the self-assessment aligned with many practices included on the TPOT.

Ellen indicated on the self-assessment that she needed support to implement practices related to teaching children how to regulate their emotions and to engage in social problem solving. She identified two initial practice goals: 1) learn how to teach children to use the turtle technique for anger management and 2) learn how to teach the problem-solving steps to children. The coach used the TPOT to guide her first observation in Ellen’s classroom the following week. Before beginning the observation, the coach asked Ellen if the children who were dual-language learners and the children with severe language delays were present in the classroom that day. Ellen indicated that they were and discretely indicated who those children were to the coach. Consistent with TPOT administration procedures, the coach spent about 2 hours in the classroom and observed teacher-directed and child-initiated activities as well as transitions between activities. The observation ended when the classroom went outdoors for play. The coach left and returned at the end of the day to conduct the TPOT interview with Ellen. After completing the first observation and interview, the coach scored the TPOT. Ellen’s initial TPOT scores are displayed. Ellen and her coach discussed these TPOT data as the basis for clarifying and verifying Ellen’s goals from the needs assessment she completed after the workshop series. Ellen and her coach noted that Ellen’s strengths were her implementation of practices related to schedules and routines, supportive conversations, collaborative teaming, interventions for children with persistent challenging behavior, and connecting with families. Overall, she had 47% of all indicators associated with key practice items scored as Yes. Two red flags were observed in her classroom, which resulted in a red flag percentage score of 12%. During the initial TPOT observation, there were five occurrences of challenging behavior, with only one of the essential strategies for responding to challenging behavior being used. The areas noted by Ellen’s coach as needing support were practices that would address red flags (i.e., strategies to support effective transitions, teaching children behavior expectations) as well as practices related to teaching social-emotional skills (i.e., friendship skills, emotions, problem solving), and supporting family use of Pyramid Model practices.

At the coaching session that occurred the week after the TPOT, the coach and Ellen finalized goals for the initial action plan. Ellen discussed the goals she had listed on her needs assessment and the coach and Ellen reviewed data from the TPOT. They discussed areas of strengths and needs. During this discussion, the coach shared her observation that the behavior challenges frustrating Ellen typically were occurring during transitions. The coach described the importance of having carefully planned transitions so children’s engagement was supported and children knew what to do during a transition.

The coach asked Ellen about her expectations for children’s behavior. Ellen responded that she wanted children to be kind to each other, play well together, and take care of materials in the classroom. The coach asked Ellen for ideas about how they could work together to make those expectations clear to the children and to identify opportunities to teach the expectations proactively. Ellen shared that she and her team members usually taught those expectations when redirecting children and that she assumed the children understood what she wanted them to do because it was stated so often each day when children were redirected.

Following their reflection and discussion, Ellen and her coach developed the initial action plan. They prioritized three goals: 1) establishing and teaching classroom expectations proactively, 2) structuring transitions, and 3) teaching the turtle technique for anger management. The plan included action steps related to each goal, the materials or resources that might be needed, and the timeline for implementing each action step. Action plan goals also included a statement that addressed when each goal would be met and answered the question, “How will I know when I am successful?”

Over the course of the school year, Ellen worked with her coach on the implementation of Pyramid Model practices and attended the workshop series. Her coach came to the classroom every 2 weeks and observed Ellen’s implementation of practices that were the focus of the action plan. Sometimes the coach would model how a practice would be implemented or would bring materials or resources to support Ellen’s implementation of practices. The coach and Ellen had a “debrief” meeting after every observation. The debrief meeting always included reflection as well as supportive and constructive feedback about practice implementation. The action plan was used in each debrief meeting and new goals were added to the action plan when appropriate (e.g., goal was achieved, new goal identified).

In late spring, Ellen’s coach conducted another TPOT observation and interview. The TPOT scores showed growth from the initial TPOT administration for all key practice items and no red flags. There was only one incident of challenging behavior, and Ellen used all of the essential strategies in her response. Ellen was very pleased to see her focused effort to implement Pyramid Model practices with the support of her coach reflected in her TPOT scores.

GREEN HILLS CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: USING THE TPOT TO PLAN PROGRAM-WIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PYRAMID MODEL

The Green Hills Child Development Center (GHCDC) is a child care program for children 2 to 5 years of age with and without disabilities. They serve 96 children in eight classrooms that are generally grouped by the age of the child. The program contracts with the local education agency to provide services to children with disabilities, including related services such as speech therapy, physical therapy, and occupational therapy. They also enroll children whose families pay tuition and children whose families receive child care subsidies. All lead teachers have at least an associate’s degree and several have bachelor’s degrees in early childhood education. Each classroom is taught by a lead teacher and an assistant teacher. GHCDC is led by a director and an associate director. The associate director is responsible for family engagement activities and for supporting and coaching teachers. The GHCDC is accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the director is committed to providing ongoing professional development to program staff.

In the spring of each school year, the director conducts a survey of all teachers to identify professional development needs for the following year. When she received the spring survey data, she noted that the top training need identified by the teachers was related to addressing children’s challenging behavior. This identified need was not a surprise to the director and associate director. Over the past year, they had grown increasingly concerned about the number of times they were called to classrooms to help teachers resolve issues related to children’s challenging behavior. The director contacted a colleague who worked at a local university to discuss the program’s concerns about challenging behavior and asked for suggestions about potential models and professional development strategies for addressing this issue. The colleague mentioned some work that was occurring at the state level around the Pyramid Model. After learning that there was promising evidence that adopting the Pyramid Model could address their identified need, she asked her colleague for more information.

After receiving information about the Pyramid Model, associated practices, and recommendations for supporting practice implementation through professional development, the director shared it with the associate director and the teaching staff. The associate director and many of the teachers were excited about the potential for implementing the Pyramid Model program-wide. The director called her colleague to determine who could assist the program in implementing the Pyramid Model. The colleague connected her to a state technical assistance professional who invited the GHCDC to bring a leadership team to a workshop series on Pyramid Model implementation. The leadership team included the director, associate director, a teacher, a teaching assistant, the speech-language pathologist, and two parents.

At the workshop series, the team learned about the critical elements for implementing the Pyramid Model program-wide and developed a blueprint for implementation. One key component of the blueprint was to develop a professional development plan for supporting teachers in implementation of Pyramid Model practices in the classrooms. The team began by planning an overview workshop of the Pyramid Model and associated practices for all staff in the program. The goal of this workshop was to introduce all staff to the program-wide Pyramid Model that was going to be adopted and to describe what implementation supports would be available. The next step of the blueprint was to identify professional development needs related to program-wide implementation.

In late November, the associate director completed TPOTs in all classrooms. The TPOT data were again summarized and averaged across teachers. During a December leadership meeting, the team reviewed the TPOT data and determined that, as a whole, the program had made progress on the areas that they had been focused on. Based on these data, the team determined the following areas for all teaching teams: 1) teaching friendship skills and emotional literacy and 2) supporting family use of Pyramid Model practices.

To address these goals, the leadership team provided two additional 2-hour workshops for teachers and a six-session parent group focused on the Pyramid Model practices. The leadership team analyzed individual teaching team scores and noted that the two teams that had received targeted support on specific areas during the preceding few months were doing significantly better in these areas. The associate director continued coaching all teams around the common goals (friendship skills, emotional literacy, supporting family use of Pyramid Model practices) and also focused on the areas of need for each teaching team.