Building a Foundation of Effective Coaching for Improving...
Transcript of Building a Foundation of Effective Coaching for Improving...
Building a Foundation of Effective Coaching for Improving Quality of Early
Childhood EnvironmentsBarb Reid, Executive Director, GRIT Edmonton
Veronica Smith, Associate Professor, University of Alberta
Alberta Education and Human Services
Why ASaP? Why ASaP?
What ‘is’ ASaP? What ‘is’ ASaP?
Teaching Pyramid Model Teaching Pyramid Model
Practice Based Coaching Practice Based Coaching
How do we know we’re doing
what we think we’re doing?
How do we know we’re doing
what we think we’re doing?
OutlineOutline
Impact of Coaching Impact of Coaching
Future Directions Future Directions
About GRIT
GRIT Program Unit Funding-Alberta Education programming for children and familiesGRIT Plus – enhanced specialized services through Human Services
ASaP – Capacity building for high quality, inclusive early learning and care Services)
Roughly 85 staff28 Educ. Consultants, 55 ECE (88% diploma/ degree), plus administration
Values – Practices - Outcomes
Change: Sense of Urgency(adapted from Council of Early Childhood Development, Ontario 2004)
Sense of Hope (Innovation)
You Tube video
Foundational Documents
Alberta Inclusive Child Care Project (2011) ECMap Early Development Instrument (2015)
Advancing the Educational Preparation and Professional Development of Alberta’s Early Learning and Care Workforce (Muttart Foundation, 2015)
Early Learning and Care Curriculum Framework for Alberta (2015)
ACCFCR Benchmark Survey- “What do Albertan’s know about Child Development?” (2008, 2014)
Center on the Developing Child (early childhood mental health diagnoses)
The ASaP Continuum Project
VisionEarly Childhood communities nurture and embrace all children and families.
MissionBy providing early learning and care programs access to the right supports, at the right time, ASaP builds upon the skills, knowledge and confidence of educators to ensure the meaningful participation and inclusion of all children.
The Pyramid Model: Promoting Social and Emotional Competence
All Children
SomeChildren
Few Children
The Center for Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/
The developing capacity of the child…• to form close and secure relationships
• to experience, regulate, andexpress emotions in sociallyand culturally appropriate ways
• to confidently explore theenvironment and learn - all inthe context of family, community and culture.
(Zero to Three- National Centre for Infant, Toddlers and Families )
What is Social and EmotionalDevelopment?
Children who “use disruptive behaviors significantly more often than his age group
over a long period of time”
(Center of Excellence for Children’s Well-Being, 2008)
Defining Challenging Behavior
ASaP: Intended Outcomes
1. System Navigation –o Right Supports, Right Place, Right Time.
2. Adult Capacity Building -o 120 Professional Practices
Theory of Change http://developingchild.harvard.edu
Intended outcomes – con’t
3. Parent Engagement Enhance social and emotional development
4. Policy Development Zero Rejection Inclusion policies Professional Development Inform support models
Supported Child Care (Human Services) Alberta Education Funding
(Mild/Moderate and PUF)
1. Navigation:Interrupting Traditional Processes
2. Capacity Building- Train/ Coach/Train
Leadership Development*Intensive Interventions
Targeted Practices
Universal Practices
Effective Workforce
Training of Professional Practices
Universal – Schedules, routines and activities3 hours Transitions between activitiesSupportive conversationsPromoting children’s engagementProviding directionsCollaborative teamingTargeted - Teaching behavior expectations3 hours Teaching social and emotional competenciesTeaching friendship skillsTeaching children to express emotionsTeaching problem solvingCommunicating/ with families Involving families in their child’s developmentIntensive - Supporting children with challenging behavior3 hours
Coaching
“Coaching is not telling people what to do, but giving them a chance to examine
what they are doing in light of their intentions”
(Sheldon & Rush, 2011)
Practice-Based Coaching(Fox, et al. 2011)
One Minute Evaluation
Clearest Point
Muddiest Point
Implementation Science - Stages
• Exploration Assess needs, capacity and fit
• Installation Development of supports and infrastructure
• Initial Implementation Service initiated, data decision drivers and continuous improvement
• Full Implementation - Skilled Implementation/ system changes, sustainability and outcomes
Community Based Research
A definition….Community-Based Participatory Research
(CBPR) -“ a partnership approach to research that equitably involves, for example, community members, organizational representatives, and researchers in all aspects of the research process” (Israel et al., 2003)
Benefits of Using a Community-engaged Approach
1. Researchers can develop questions about “community” issues of concern with the community
Results likely to be translatable
2. Community partnerships can help participant recruitment
Community understanding can bring community support
Benefits of Using a Community-engaged Approach
3. Community-engagement can improve the reliability and validity of:
Measurement tools Questions and study procedures
4. Can inform researchers of community interpretations of research results
g p y g p
title: "Research Diagram/Research Reality" - originally published 1/7/2008
Disadvantages….
ASaP Research in the First
Three Years
Professional Practice Outcomes
(i.e., TPOT measure)
ASaP Coaching(i.e., coaching logs, ELC
Educator reflections)
Monitoring Capacity BuildingTPOT – Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool
(Hemmerter & Snyder, 2008)
2 hour observation
30 minute interview
Debrief with staff
Professional goal setting
Professional Growth/ Change
Percentage of Site Leads use ofPyramid Model Practices at Baseline
(n=28)
Universal Practices Targeted Practices &Intensive Interventions
belo
w 5
0%80
% o
r hig
her
50%
14%
96%
82%
68%
Theory of Change
Professional Practice Outcomes
(i.e., TPOT measure)
ASaP Coaching(i.e., coaching logs, ELC
Educator reflections)
Early Learning and Care Centre Conditions
(e.g., level of SES, child transiency, educator transiency,
number of children, support staff)
Early Learning and Care Educator Characteristics(e.g., level of engagement,
readiness for change, education, experience)
Research Questions
The ASaP team were interested in finding out:
1. What are our coaching practices? 2. How do we know we are doing what we say
we’re doing? 3. Do other members of the coaching team
understand coaching in the same way?4. How do ELC educators experience our
coaching?
Method and Procedures
Developed (and redeveloped) a Coaching Log to capture the: Structure – time, duration, intervals Process – activities and interactions Content – focus of the sessions
ELC Coaching Reflection Process and Content dimensions Reflection of the experience
Demographic Information About the Educators About the Centres
Three Feedback Sessions
Two purposes: 1. To summarize the big picture while providing each coach
with individual feedback 2. To develop and improve the coach’s sharing understanding
of their practices
Findings: Improved Understanding
Coaching Processes Clarified activities that take place ‘in ratio’ and ‘out of ratio’ Deepened dimension of ‘performance feedback’
‘supportive feedback’ ‘constructive feedback’
Queried processes that were not used as frequently Video feedback Modeling
Over time greater alignment of practices across coaches
How do we know that we are doing what we
say we are doing?
STRUCTURESTRUCTURE
145150
185
88
32
123
Duration
7
28
17
Intervals(days )
6
16
10
Sessions(over 6 mo)
Coaches
Content of Coaching
Contrasting Video Observation with Coaching Logs
Process
93.85%
Content
Intensive:100%
Targeted:100%
Universal:87.14%
Findings: Positive Reception of Coaching
Theory of Change
Professional Practice Outcomes
(i.e., TPOT measure)
ASaP Coaching(i.e., coaching logs, ELC
Educator reflections)
Early Learning and Care Centre Conditions
(e.g., level of SES, child transiency, educator transiency,
number of children, support staff)
Early Learning and Care Educator Characteristics(e.g., level of engagement,
readiness for change, education, experience)
CASE STUDY #1Centre with 5 Risk Factors
ELC Engagement(1 = not a lot like me – 5 = a lot like me)
TrustCo-
operation/AmbitionDiligence
SatisfactionRelevance
Stress
4.4 4.0 3.4 4.25 4.3 4.67
Educator is an English language learnerCoaching Received: 9 sessions from Feb – JuneGoals included: Teaching Behaviour Expectations, Schedules and routines, Teaching the expression of emotion
Uni
vers
alTa
rget
ed
Case Study #2Centre with 1-2 Risk factors
ELC Engagement(1 = not a lot like me – 5 = a lot like me)
TrustCo-
operation/AmbitionDiligence
SatisfactionRelevance
Stress
4.86 4.6
3.8 5.0 4.0 4.0
Educator Received: 1 year of coaching, in the past 6 month, 12 session (12 in ratio and 8 out)Goals included: Teaching children to express emotions, teaching problem solving, teaching behaviour expectations
Uni
vers
alTa
rget
ed
One Minute Evaluation
Clearest Point
Muddiest Point
Initial Implementation:What we learned
Turn over is inevitable
Investment on one Site Lead does not lead to sustainability
Onsite leadership is key
Need to consider centre/ staff risk factors
Embedding diverse fields of study/ philosophies
From Research Coaching fidelity - “Heavy” vs. “light” coaching
Risk factors may inform practices (data-based decisions)
Deliverables Going forwardAlberta Human Services 2015-2017
1. Shift to Program Wide Implementation -
Leadership team and peer to peer coach
2. Scale Up – Edm., Calgary and Central Region Expand ASaP Team (Coaches, trainers etc.) Identify and support new and demonstration sites
3. Engage families Increase awareness of social and emotional development Family learning - (ASQ 3; ASQ-SE)
4. Explore trauma informed models (care providers)
Where are we now?
Program Wide Implementation/ Scale Up Innoweave training (Nov 2015) Detailed 1 year work plan Continuing Sites – 15 in Edmonton New Sites - 6 Calgary, 2 Central Region New Master Cadre Team Members
- 3 coaches- 1 Trainer - 3 Co-facilitators -leadership development in Sites- Mental Health Consultant
Role for Provincial Advisory Committee
Support process of implementation science
Support development of expected outcomes
Linking and leveraging with other provincial
initiatives
Inform policy development
Any knowledge/ member missing
Other?
56
Questions?