Susan M. Sheridan, PhDNebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth,

Families & Schools

Presented at the Annual Meeting of the International School Psychology Association,

Dublin, Ireland. July, 2010

Collaborative Problem-Solving Among Families and

Schools:

Effects of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation on Student Behaviors and

Parent-Teacher Relationships

Why Family-School Partnerships?

“The evidence is consistent, positive, and convincing: families have a major influence on their children’s achievement in school and through life… The research continues to grow and build an ever-strengthening case. When schools, families, and community groups work together to support learning, children tend to do better in school, stay in school longer, and like school more.” (Henderson & Mapp, 2002)

Conjoint Behavioral Consultation

Promotes and supports home-school partnerships in the context of cooperative and collegial problem-solving Emphasizes meaningful parental/family engagement in education A vehicle by which to foster constructive, goal directed, solution-oriented services for children An extension of traditional (teacher) consultation that goes beyond the school setting and brings parents into the intervention and decision making process

Conjoint Behavioral Consultation:A Definition

A strength-based problem-solving and decision-making model wherein parents, teachers, and other caregivers or service providers work as partners and share responsibility for promoting positive and consistent outcomes related to a child’s academic, behavioral, and social-emotional development (Sheridan & Kratochwill, 2008, p. 25).All stages of consultation (from problem identification to plan evaluation) are conducted with parents and teachers together, in a collaborative manner.

Problem/Needs IdentificationIdentify child strengths & concernsSpecify a target for intervention (i.e., what behavior is present or lacking that precludes a child’s full capacity to learn?)

Problem/Needs AnalysisReview baseline dataDetermine conditions that contribute to the problem (e.g., skill deficits or environmental events) or function the behavior is serving (e.g., attention, escape)

See See http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.htmlhtml

Stages of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation

Plan ImplementationCo-create meaningful intervention plan across home and schoolEnsure parent and teacher skill development via training and support of treatment plan implementation

Plan EvaluationEvaluate child’s progress toward co-established goalsModify intervention plans as necessaryPlan for ongoing success and partnering

Stages of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation

See See http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.htmlhtml

CBC Outcome Goals

Address students’ learning, behavioral, and/or social-emotional needs over extended time (temporal) and place (context) Establish consistent programming and encourage continuity across settingsMonitor effects (and side effects) of interventions systematically across settingsImprove skills and knowledge of all partiesEnhance generalization and maintenance of treatment effects

CBC Relational Goals

Establish and strengthen home-school relationships and partnerships

Improve communication and knowledge about the child, family, and classroom

Promote shared ownership for students’ learningEncourage parents to establish positive beliefs about their role in in their child’s learningFacilitate teachers’ perceptions about the benefits of parent involvement

Video Example

• CBC has been found to be effective for behavioral, academic, and social-emotional concerns (Guli, 2005; Sheridan, Eagle, Cowan, & Mickelson, 2001), across unique contexts.

• Efficacy research to date has relied on small-n experimental and replication studies.

• Design limitations precluded inferences about generalizability and information about how CBC works to produce effects.

Research Support(see Sheridan, Clarke, & Burt, 2008)

Current Research: CBC in the Early Grades

A 4-cohort randomized trial testing the efficacy of CBC funded by the Institute of Education SciencesResearch questions:1. What is the effect of CBC on children’s disruptive

behaviors at school and home?2. What is the effect of CBC on parent participation in

problem solving?3. What is the effect of CBC on the parent-teacher

relationship, and teachers’ beliefs about parent involvement?

4. What accounts for CBC’s effects? What is the pathway through which it exerts its effects?

Participants & Data Collection

207 K-3 students and their parents and teachers from 21 schools participated over 4 years

82 classrooms were randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions

Students with disruptive classroom behaviors (e.g., non-compliance, aggression) were selected based on teacher nomination, ratings on a short behavioral inventory, and the Systematic Screening for Behavior Disorders (SSBD; Walker & Seversen, 1990)

Assessments conducted at baseline and post-CBC; follow up assessments conducted in the following academic year

Select Measures

Direct Classroom BehaviorsParent Daily Report (Chamberlain & Reid, 1987)Behavioral Assessment Scale for Children (Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004)Social Skills Rating System (Gresham & Elliott, 1990)Parent Participation in Problem Solving (Sheridan, 2003)Parent-Teacher Rating Scale-II (Vickers & Minke, 1995)Teacher Beliefs about Parent Involvement (Hoover-Dempsey et al.; 1992, 2002)

CBC Implementation

4 to 5 conjoint consultation sessions occurred over 8 to 12 weeks in small groups with parents of 2 to 3 students and the classroom teacher

Noncompliance

(e.g., work refusal)

Disengaged(e.g., off

task)

Interference

(e.g., shout outs)

Aggression(e.g.,

hitting peer)

Home 41% 24% 32% 2%

School 22% 40% 35% 3%

Represents percentage of cases that targeted certain types/categories of behaviors.

Evidence-Based InterventionsHome-School Notes (or

equivalent)100% of cases

Positive Consequences Approx 97% of cases Examples:

Grab Bag of Rewards Catch Being Good

Preventive Technique Approx 61% of casesExamples:

Activity Checklists Seating Arrangement

Skill Building Approx 35% of casesExamples:

Social Skills Training Self Monitoring

Reductive ConsequencesApprox 12% of casesExamples:

Response Cost Time Out

Data Analyses

Effect of CBC on child outcomes and parent/teacher relationships

3-level multilevel model (time points within individuals within teachers) examining the fixed effect of time by treatment interaction (γ) Randomization occurred at the level of the teacher

Mediating effect of the parent-teacher relationship was tested

Path analysis with a bootstrap method (Preacher, Zyphur & Zhang, in press)

Student Effects at School

Relative to a control group, CBC produced significant improvements in observations of:

Engaged time in the classroom t(144.9) = 2.23; p < .05Nonphysical aggression t(199.9) = -2.31; p < .05)Physical aggression t(248.4) = -1.61; p = .10)

Relative to a control group, CBC produced significant improvements in teacher reported:

Externalizing problems (γ=-2.60; t(162)=-1.98; p < .05; ES = -.34)Adaptive skills (γ=1.99; t(158)=1.99; p < .05; ES = .47)Social skills (γ=3.66; t(164)=2.40; p < .05; ES = .44)

Teacher Reported Externalizing Behaviors

Teacher Reported Adaptive Skills

Teacher Reported Social Skills

Student Effects at Home

Relative to a control group, CBC produced significant improvements in:

Total Problem Behaviors, t(100.4) = -2.07, p < .05Follow-up analyses of PDR found significant improvements in:

Defiance, t(175.5) = -2.26, p < .05Noncompliance, t(177.4) = -2.82, p < .05Teasing, t(220.8) = -2.64, p < .05Arguing, t(189.6) = -2.31, p < .05

Total Problems: Home

CBC

Control

Noncompliance: Home

Control

CBC

Defiance: Home

CBC

Arguing: Home

CBC

Current Research Findings: Parents

Relative to control parents, those who participated in CBC reported to increase their:

active participation in educational problem solving (γ=.556; t(87.84)=3.83; p < .001)

Parent Participation in Problem Solving

CBC

Control

Current Research Findings: Teachers

Relative to control teachers, positive outcomes for CBC teachers include:

better overall relationship with parents (γ=.16; t(174)=2.53; p <.01; ES = .55)more positive beliefs about parental involvement (γ= .271; t(74.91)=2.94; p <.01)

Parent-Teacher Relationship (Teacher)

Control

Teacher Beliefs about Parent Involvement

Investigated whether the parent-teacher relationship mediates (accounts for) CBC’s effects.

The parent-teacher relationship accounted for the positive CBC effect on children’s

Increased adaptive skills (p < .05)Increased social skills (p < .05)Decreased externalizing behaviors (marginal; p = .053)

Mediation: What Accounts for the Effects?

Mediation: Parent-Teacher Relationship

CBCSocial

AdaptiveExternalizin

g

Parent-Teacher

Relationship

S=.18*

A=.18*

E=.18*

S=.21*

A=.20*

E=-.18*

S=.11

A=.09

E=-.17*

The parent-teacher relationship mediates the effects of CBC on child behaviors

Discussion of Findings

CBC produces important outcomes for all parties:

Significant improvements in child behaviorSignificant improvement in parent participation & home-school communicationSignificant improvement in teacher beliefs & teacher-parent relationships

Discussion of Findings

CBC seems to have its effects through the parent-teacher relationship

Points to the importance of attending to the parent-teacher relationship within the context of ongoing CBC practiceReinforces belief in the mesosystem as significant to a child’s healthy functioning

Ongoing Research

Still investigating outcomes as assessed via direct observations in classrooms (via HLM)Still investigating other mediators, such as implementation fidelity, parent/teacher engagement, and continuity across home and school

Exploring measurement issues associated with fidelity (see Sheridan et al., 2009; SPR)Exploring conceptual and empirical issues related to engagement and continuity

Ongoing Research

Need to investigate moderation – under what conditions can we expect CBC to have its greatest effect?

Investigating moderators such as target behavior, student disability status/special education services

Follow up data collection still underwayWill answer questions regarding maintenance of effects

Need to determine application and efficacy in the context of “authentic” practiceNeed to explore efficacy with other behaviors (e.g., academic) and in other settings (e.g., rural)

Thank You!!

For more information or correspondence:

Susan M. Sheridan, Ph.D.George Holmes University Professor of Educational

PsychologyNebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth,

Families and Schools216 Mabel Lee Hall

University of Nebraska-LincolnLincoln, NE 68588-0235

ssheridan2@unl.eduResearch funded by IES Grant #R305F050284