Download
1 / 36
360 likes | 557 Views
Framework for intervention / FiN STIL in Norway: Evaluation of a pilot project . Stavern May 16, 2007 Kari Nes Associate Professor of Hedmark University College. The presentation includes:. 1. Introduction to the evaluation project 2. Results in schools jointly
E N D
Framework for intervention / FiN STIL in Norway:Evaluation of a pilot project Stavern May 16, 2007 Kari Nes Associate Professor of Hedmark University College
The presentation includes: 1. Introduction to the evaluation project 2. Results in schools jointly 3. Differences between schools 4. How is the FiN STIL model regarded? 5. Summing up
1.INTRODUCTION Basic questions of the evaluation: • Is FiN STIL an adequate model to meet behaviour problems in Norwegian schools, and what experiences do teachers have from working with FiN STIL?
“All in all, the data show that through observations, behaviour registration and experiences many teachers find that the project has resulted in positive changes at student level as well as classroom and school level. … there is reason to believe that the FiN STIL model has triggered processes that will influence the learning environment favourably in the participating schools.” (Bern and Nordahl 2007: )
Methods in the evaluation Collected FiN STIL-materials: • Behavioural environment checklists used in the schools • Behavioural environment plans developed in the schools • Individual behaviour plans made in the schools Teachers’ views: • Interviews of teachers and FiN STIL coordinators in all schools • Teacher survey of selected issues
Methods • Quantitative and qualitative methods are used in the evaluation. • The evaluation focuses on the process and on teachers’ view of outcome rather than results on student level. • The evaluation has been led by Professor Thomas Nordahl and carried out by Hedmark University College. A report by Kari Bern and Thomas Nordahl presents the results.
Interviews • Group interviews of teachers (75 persons) • Individual interviews of coordinators
Survey • Questionnaire sent to all teachers at the beginning and at the end of the project. • Part 1: School culture and collaboration • Part 2: Teachers’ qualifications with regards to behaviour problems.
2. RESULTS • What were the teachers concerned about? • Classroom level • Individual level • School level • What did they do? • Behavioural environment plans (BEP) • Is there any change?
Change • Close to 70 % of the expressions of concern eventually led to substantial change. • In 9 of the11 individual cases clear progress is made. • On school level many changes occurred, like establishing common rules for all classes.
Change • “We have been helped to structure the knowledge and competence we already had.” • “We are more conscious about what is going on, what we do and how it works. Great to learn that it really works to focus on what is positive.”
Change - survey results Teachers’ view of their qualifications concerning behaviour problems Teachers’ view of school culture and collaboration in general
3. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SCHOOLS The six scools vary a lot • As to how much and how the tools are used • As to what is registered in the checklist. • Between primary and secondary level, ex. ’Classroom organisation’ average score on checklist : primary school 3,5 secondary school 2,5
4. HOW IS THE FiN STIL MODEL REGARDED? • How did it all start? • Half of the interviewed expressed that FiN STIL met a need in the school to do something about behaviour problems. • “We needed a system to tackle ’behaviour’. We have many approaches .. we tried to collect loose ends. Wanted to join FiN STIL to achieve continuity.”
The other half of the informants said that the decision about joining this project was taken without their prior agreement. Some think that their school joined because of the extra funding connected to it. ” The head threw himself headlong into the project” “The leaders had been to some seminar or other and then we suddenly started. There is this tendency to jump onto the bandwagon when there are projects about.”
Information and courses • A little less than half of the teachers found the initial information satisfactory. Others felt some of it was a waste of time, and some had problems with the English language. • Courses at their own school were generally regarded as very useful. Most teachers felt that they learnt a lot about the project, once getting down to realities at their own school. A few questioned the way the coordinator was appointed.
Expectations • Some teachers had expected a clear procedure for dealing with serious challenging behaviour which was a problem in their school. They were disappointed. • 1/3 of the interviewed were unhappy about FiN STIL coming in addition to other large projects already going on at the school.
The instruments of FIN STIL • Close to half of the informants regard the checklist as a good and useful instrument. “ We follow the routines for FiN STIL. Just reading the checklist solves half the problem. A manageable instrument, helping to reflect on one’s own practice.”
Checklist • Others found the checklist too long or not relevant. But the attitude of nearly all informants to using the checklist at school level was a positive one. Teachers appreciated relevant parts of the instrument used in collaboration at a whole school level.
Checklist • The completed checklists are statistically analysed. • There is a very good reliability in each factor of the checklist (ex ‘rules’, ‘classroom organisation’). The single items of the checklist represent the topics very well. The list is a good instrument that works just as well in Norway as in England. Based on this analysis the checklist is a reliable tool for schools to use, even as an instrument for schools’ self evaluation.
Baselining • Observation and baselining were generally well received, as well as the behaviour environment plans. • Some teachers looked upon all the FiN STIL documents (behaviour registration forms etc.) as confusing. Some were frustrated when trying to use them because they were supposed to teach and register student behaviour at the same time.
Values of FiN STIL • Values and attitudes on which FiN STIL is based correspond quite well to the teachers’ own, with some exceptions. • The issue of reward had been widely discussed. Even if seen as useful too, many felt that the checklist paid too much attention to rewards. • Relations between students and adults should have been more highlighted, according to some. • Almost all felt that the checklist was helpful to identify questions of classroom rules and classroom management etc. and to draw attention to a more conscious use of appraisal.
Individually or collaboratively? • All teachers seemed to emphasise collaboration as the normal approach to problem solving. Many feel that this is not consistent with the individual expression of concern to a coordinator and the individual filling in of a checklist. • Team teaching is the norm, and the team is the number one place to address a worry. This is also where a behaviour environment plan should be discussed. • “We regard the problems as ours, not the individual teacher’s, and we work closely in the team.”
Support? Who supports the teachers’ efforts with FiN STIL? • Nearly all mention the coordinator and courses held by Lillegården, 1/3 find the head to be supportive, but not one of teachers or coordinators has experienced PP staff as participating and supportive.
5. SUMMING UP • Many teachers find that the processes and instruments of the project have resulted in positive changes at student level as well as classroom and school level. 4 out of 6 schools want to continue with FiN STIL. • The lists of main measures taken at the schools correspond with recent research on what works in improving learning environment. • Whole school level approaches receive strong support among the teachers. • Variations between schools are great. • Teachers find use of the instruments (too?) time consuming. • The checklist has a great potential as a school improvement instrument as well as source for research.
Suggestions for change • All informants agree that the FiN STIL model needs adaptation to the collaborative structures in the schools (e.g. teacher teams). • The initial implementation strategies probably should pay more attention to participation and bottom-up strategies in order to foster a greater sense of ownership of the project.
