1. Susan M. Sheridan, PhD Nebraska 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

2. 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)

3. 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

4. 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.

5. Problem/Needs Identification Identify child strengths & concerns Specify a target for intervention (i.e., what behavior is present or lacking that precludes a child’s full capacity to learn?) Problem/Needs Analysis Review baseline data Determine conditions that contribute to the problem (e.g., skill deficits or environmental events) or function the behavior is serving (e.g., attention, escape) See http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.html Stages of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation

6. Plan Implementation Co-create meaningful intervention plan across home and school Ensure parent and teacher skill development via training and support of treatment plan implementation Plan Evaluation Evaluate child’s progress toward co-established goals Modify intervention plans as necessary Plan for ongoing success and partnering Stages of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation See http://fsp.unl.edu/future_module3.html

7. 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 settings Monitor effects (and side effects) of interventions systematically across settings Improve skills and knowledge of all parties Enhance generalization and maintenance of treatment effects

8. 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’ learning Encourage parents to establish positive beliefs about their role in in their child’s learning Facilitate teachers’ perceptions about the benefits of parent involvement

9. Video Example

10. 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)

11. Current Research: CBC in the Early Grades A 4-cohort randomized trial testing the efficacy of CBC funded by the Institute of Education Sciences Research 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?

12. 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

13. Select Measures Direct Classroom Behaviors Parent 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)

14. 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) Home41%24%32%2% School22%40%35%3% Represents percentage of cases that targeted certain types/categories of behaviors.

15. Evidence-Based Interventions Home-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 cases Examples: Activity Checklists Seating Arrangement Skill Building Approx 35% of cases Examples: Social Skills Training Self Monitoring Reductive Consequences Approx 12% of cases Examples: Response Cost Time Out

16. 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)

17. 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 <.05 Nonphysical 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)

18. Teacher Reported Externalizing Behaviors

19. Teacher Reported Adaptive Skills

20. Teacher Reported Social Skills

21. Student Effects at Home Relative to a control group, CBC produced significant improvements in: Total Problem Behaviors, t (100.4) = -2.07, p <.05 Follow-up analyses of PDR found significant improvements in: Defiance, t (175.5) = -2.26, p <.05 Noncompliance, t (177.4) = -2.82, p <.05 Teasing, t (220.8) = -2.64, p <.05 Arguing, t (189.6) = -2.31, p <.05

22. Total Problems: Home CBC Control

23. Noncompliance: Home Control CBC

24. Defiance: Home CBC

25. Arguing: Home CBC

26. 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)

27. Parent Participation in Problem Solving CBC Control

28. 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)

29. Parent-Teacher Relationship (Teacher) Control

30. Teacher Beliefs about Parent Involvement

31. 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?

32. Mediation: Parent-Teacher Relationship CBC Social Adaptive Externalizing 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

33. Discussion of Findings CBC produces important outcomes for all parties: Significant improvements in child behavior Significant improvement in parent participation & home-school communication Significant improvement in teacher beliefs & teacher-parent relationships

34. 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 practice Reinforces belief in the mesosystem as significant to a child’s healthy functioning

35. 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

36. 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 underway Will answer questions regarding maintenance of effects Need to determine application and efficacy in the context of “authentic” practice Need to explore efficacy with other behaviors (e.g., academic) and in other settings (e.g., rural)

37. Thank You!! For more information or correspondence: Susan M. Sheridan, Ph.D. George Holmes University Professor of Educational Psychology Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools 216 Mabel Lee Hall University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68588-0235 ssheridan2@unl.edu Research funded by IES Grant #R305F050284