Setting-Level Influences on Implementation of the Responsive Classroom Approach
We used mixed methods to examine the association between setting-level factors and observed implementation of a social and emotional learning intervention (Responsive Classroom® approach; RC). In study 1 (N = 33 3rd grade teachers after the first year of RC implementation), we identified relevant setting-level factors and uncovered the mechanisms through which they related to implementation. In study 2 (N = 50 4th grade teachers after the second year of RC implementation), we validated our most salient Study 1 finding across multiple informants. Findings suggested that teachers perceived setting-level factors, particularly principal buy-in to the intervention and individualized coaching, as influential to their degree of implementation. Further, we found that intervention coaches’ perspectives of principal buy-in were more related to implementation than principals’ or teachers’ perspectives. Findings extend the application of setting theory to the field of implementation science and suggest that interventionists may want to consider particular accounts of school setting factors before determining the likelihood of schools achieving high levels of implementation.
KeywordsImplementation Intervention Social-emotional learning Mixed methods
The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A070063 to the University of Virginia. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the U.S. Department of Education.
- Beets, M. W., Flay, B. R., Vuchinich, S., Acock, A. C., Li, K.-K., & Allred, C. (2008). School climate and teachers' beliefs and attitudes associated with implementation of the Positive Action Program: A diffusion of innovations model. Prevention Science, 9, 264–275. doi: 10.1007/s11121-008-0100-2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Berends, M., Bodilly, S. J., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole-school reform: New American schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: New American Schools and RAND.Google Scholar
- Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. L. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation Publications.Google Scholar
- Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership, 60, 40–45. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org.
- Dariotis, J. K., Bumbarger, B. K., Duncan, L. G., & Greenberg, M. T. (2008). How do implementation efforts relate to program adherence? Examining the role of organizational, implementer, and program factors. Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 744–760. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Downer, J. T., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2009). Teacher characteristics associated with responsiveness and exposure to consultation and online professional development resources. Early Education and Development, 20, 431–455. doi: 10.1080/10409280802688626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Durlak, J. A. (2010). The importance of doing well in whatever you do: A commentary on the special section, “Implementation research in early childhood education.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 348–357. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.03.003.
- Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta analysis of school based universal interventions. Child Development, 82, 405–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Elias, M. E., Zins, J., Graczyk, P. A., & Weissberg, R. (2003). Implementation, sustainability, and scaling up of social-emotional and academic innovations. School Psychology Review, 32, 303–319. Retrived from: http://www.nasponline.org/publications/spr/
- Elmore, R. F., & McLaughlin, M. (1988). Steady work: Policy, practice, and the reform of American education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp.Google Scholar
- Evans, R. (2001). The human side of school change: Reform, resistance, and the real-life problems of innovations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Fine, L. (2010). Education teamwork seen as key to school gains. Retrieved from: http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2010/02/17/metlife.html.
- Fixsen, D. L., Blase, K. A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009). Scaling-up brief: Intensive technical assistance state implementation & scaling-up of evidence-based practices. Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
- Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Graczyk, P. A., & Zins, J. E. (2005). The study of implementation in school-based preventive interventions: Theory, research, and practice (Vol. 3). Rockville, MD: Center for Mental Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Google Scholar
- Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
- Kam, C. M., Greenberg, M. T., & Walls, C. T. (2003). Examining the role of implementation quality in school-based prevention using the PATHS curriculum. Prevention Science, 4, 55–63. Retrived from http://www.springerlink.com/content/104965/
- Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). Transformational leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership (pp. 31–43). London, UK: Chapman Educational Publishing.Google Scholar
- Mancini, A. D., Moser, L. L., Whitlet, R., McHugo, G. J., Bond, G. R., Finnerty, M. T., & Burns, B. J. (2009). Assertive community treatment: Facilitators and barriers to implementation in routine mental health settings. Psychiatric Services, 60, 189–195. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.60.2.189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Marshall, J. C., & Caldwell, S. D. (2007). Caring School CommunityTM implementation study: Four year evaluation report: Marshall Consulting and International Learning Services.Google Scholar
- Mashburn, A. J., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J. T., & Pianta, R. C. (2006). Teacher and classroom characteristics associated with teachers’ ratings of prekindergarteners’ relationships and behaviors. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 24, 367–380. doi: 10.1177/0734282906290594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Metz, A. J. R. (2007). A 10-step guide to adopting and sustaining evidence-based practices in out-of-school time programs. Research to results practice brief. Washington, DC: Child Trends.Google Scholar
- Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, DC: Sage.Google Scholar
- Muthén, B., & Muthén, L. K. (2010). Mplus (Version 6.1). Los Angeles, CA: Author.Google Scholar
- Northeast Foundation for Children (NEFC). (2003). The responsive classroom level 1 workbook. Greenfield, AR: Author.Google Scholar
- O'Donnell, C. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78, 33.Google Scholar
- Ottmar, E., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Berry, R. Q. (2012). Results from a randomized controlled trial: Does the Responsive Classroom approach impact the use of standards-based methematics teaching practices? Manuscript under review.Google Scholar
- Powell, D. R., Diamond, K. E., & Koehler, M. J. (2012). Use of a case-based hypermedia resource in an early literacy coaching intervention with pre-kindergarten teachers Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. doi: 10.1177/0271121409353610
- Ransford, C. R., Greenberg, M. T., Domitrovich, C. E., Small, M., & Jacobson, L. (2009). The role of teachers’ psychological experiences and perceptions of curriculum supports on the implementation of a social and emotional learning curriculum. School Psychology Review, 38, 510–532.Google Scholar
- Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook on research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 905–947). Washington, DC: AERA.Google Scholar
- Ringwalt, C. L., Ennett, S., Johnson, R., Rohrbach, L. A., Simons-Rudolph, A., Vincus, A., & Thorne, J. (2003). Factors associated with fidelity to substance use prevention curriculum guides in the nation’s middle schools. Health Education & Behavior, 30, 375–391. doi: 10.1177/1090198103030003010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, DC: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Wallace, F., Blase, K., Fixsen, D., & Naoom, S. (2008). Implementing the findings of research: Bridging the gap between knowledge and practice. Alexandria, VA: Educational Research Service.Google Scholar
- Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive measures in the social sciences. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar