An Analysis of Preference Relative to Teacher Implementation of Intervention

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to conduct a preference trial as a preliminary test of preference effects on teacher behavior relative to implementation (adoption, adherence, quality). Teachers were randomly assigned to "preference" or "nopreference" groups and then trained to implement the intervention. Direct observation occurred immediately after initial training, after 6 weeks of coaching support, and after 4 weeks of no support. Results showed that, when compared with the no-preference group, teachers who had the opportunity to exert a preference adopted the intervention sooner and sustained higher fidelity and quality of implementation independent of coaching. Furthermore, though most teachers in the no-preference group did adopt the intervention and demonstrate high fidelity following coaching, implementation did not sustain after the withdrawal of coaching.

Breaking down buy‐in: Can lessons from social psychology increase teacher use of proactive behavior management?

“…Finally, features of the PD itself may affect the inner narratives teachers develop and future implementation. For example, in a randomized controlled trial, Johnson et al (2014) compared the implementation of the Good Behavior Game (GBG; Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969) between teachers charged with implementing the GBG and teachers who had the choice of implementing the GBG or another classroom management strategy. Although both groups received equivalent trainings on GBG implementation, the group that chose to implement the GBG had significantly greater treatment integrity ( M = 70%) at the outset of the study compared with the group that did not choose to implement the GBG ( M = 35%).…”

“…School‐based consultation studies have found that many teachers significantly decrease behavior intervention fidelity after outside support has ended (Noell et al, 2000). For example, Johnson et al (2014) found that teachers' treatment integrity decreased from 66% to 36% four weeks after coaching ended. Stormont, Reinke, Newcomer, Marchese, and Lewis (2015) reviewed studies incorporating performance feedback for teacher use of PBM and found that only 28% collected follow up data.…”

“…The traditional theoretical model of developing supportive teacher beliefs, or buy‐in, regarding PBM is that increasing teacher knowledge and use of PBM will result in improved student behavior, which will then foster teacher supportive beliefs and sustained implementation (Guskey, 2002; Mitchell, Hirn, & Lewis, 2017). However, research has shown that this model often does not hold (e.g., Johnson et al, 2014; Simonsen et al, 2017), potentially due to a variety of faulty assumptions about teacher implementation, including that teachers can readily detect changes in student behavior and that implementation will require little adjustment to other aspects of teacher practice (Gersten, Vaughn, Deshler, & Schiller, 1997). On the contrary, in some contexts, changes in teacher beliefs may be necessary to enact sustained changes in practice (Brownell & Leko, 2018).…”

What Influences Educators’ Design Preferences for Bullying Prevention Programs? Multi-level Latent Class Analysis of a Discrete Choice Experiment

“…(Chorpita et al, 2015, p. 79). Educators allowed to select a practice consistent with their preferences adopted the intervention more rapidly, implemented the intervention with greater fidelity, and were more likely to sustain the intervention than the non-preference group (Johnson et al, 2014).…”

Instructional Package to Promote Early Educators’ Use of Behavior-Specific Praise

“…Participants' ratings of acceptability are important to highlight because there is evidence that educators will more quickly adopt and while in the absence of coaching, maintain new teaching practices for longer when those teaching practices are preferred (Johnson et al, 2014). On average, participants liked to use, thought they were effective, and would recommend selfmonitoring and BSP to other educators.…”