Implementation of the Hand in Hand program – lessons learnedConference: Do we need a relational revolution in schools?

Birgitte Lund Nielsen, VIA University College, Aarhus, Denmark, BLN@via.dk

Agenda

We should not think about SEL programs as

being effective; it is well-implemented SEL

programs that are effective ” Durlak et al., 2015

§ Backgroundo How to think about implementation?

§ Implementation research in Hand in Hand projecto Aims o Methodso Findings

§ Perspectives

Scientific Monography, Kozina, 2020Chapter 5: Nielsen, 2020

What kind of focus on implementation?

§ One kind of definition of implementation o To put an innovation into practice in such a way that it meets the necessary

standards to achieve the innovation’s desired outcomes Meyers et al, 2012

§ But …..o The important role that adaptation can play in program-implementation might

be the most provocative finding of this review Durlak and DuPre 2008

§ Effects from SEL programs differ quite much Nielsen et al., 2019

o adaptations at the classroom level, not policy makers’ plans, largely determine programs’ effectiveness Penuel et al., 2011

o there will always – intended or unintended – happen a transformation of “the object of implementation”.

§ Our focus have been different than “level of meeting standards”o the processes of translation Røvik 2015; 2016

o several steps of translation in HAND in HANDo the implementers (competencies, support etc.)

Translation and transitions

§ “The objects of implementation” are going through a process of change when being used in a concrete practiceo these changes can be seen as processes of translation Røvik 2015; 2016

o or consequential transitions - sociocultural transfer research King, 1999

o Transitions: complex patterns, more thano Consequential: what is emphasised as important by the

professionals/in the professional context

§ Hand in Hand: Several steps of translation/transitions o in the meeting between programme development and trainerso in the meetings between trainers and teachers (and/or students) o in the meeting of teachers with students and/or colleagues.

Initiation

Decision-making

Capacity-building

Application Experimentation

Adaptation

Sustaina-bilisation

Prerequisite-analysis

Implementation-processes

Adapted from Lund, 2018

Data focuses on the complex processes and the meaning-making of the trainers

Research aims§ Follow over time how trainers from the 3 countries perceived

the process of translating/adapting the program to the local conditions

§ What they emphasise as possibilities and challenges§ Their reflections about the active ingredients:

1) working with a variety of inner meditative exercises, more outer-going physical exercises and dialogue exercises

2) using "gearshifts" (e.g. between outer going and more inward going exercises)

3) working to establish close contact with school staff and students.

Methods

§ Mixed design o mainly qualitative data, but also likert-scale answers o structured reflection logs after each session at the schoolso from introduction meetings to training sessions for school staff,

leaders and counsellors, and students (the whole school approach Jennings & Greenberg, 2009)

§ Analysiso inputs (n=121) from May to December 2018, from trainers from

Sweden, Croatia and Slovenia o thematic analysis of open reflections Braun & Clarke, 2006

o frequency analysis and cross tabulations of the likert-scale answers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

To what degree did you experience to succeed in includingavariation with different kind of exercises (dialogue, physical

exercises, inner exercises)?

To what degree did you experience to succeed in using"gearshifts" (e.g. between outer going and more inward going

exercises)?

To what degree did you experience to succeed in being inclose contact/dialogue with the participants along the session?

To a very high degree To a high degree To some degree

To a low degree To a very low degree Don't know/non eligible

Findings

§ Interplay between trainers and school staff + students § Data after the first 2 months

The full dataset:

§ A development in general (more in ’very high’ and ‘high’) § A particular development in relation to the experience of

succeeding in close contact and dialogue

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

To what degree did you experience to succeed in includingavariation with different kind of exercises (dialogue, physical

exercises, inner exercises)?

To what degree did you experience to succeed in using"gearshifts" (e.g. between outer going and more inward

going exercises)?

To what degree did you experience to succeed in being inclose contact/dialogue with the participants along the

session?

To a very high degree To a high degree To some degree

To a low degree To a very low degree Don't know/non eligible

Reflections on the social climate: Teachers § June, 2018:

o …the atmosphere was bad, some of the teachers did not say hello back …it felt they were forced to be there by school coordinator. Their thoughts were somewhere else and it was hard to be enthusiastic about the program and the project….

§ August 2018:o The atmosphere was better, a lot of positive feedback …participants started to share

their experiences, thoughts. Some reflected that they were really focused on finding solutions on the first day and they feel now ..they are here just for themselves. They provided some insight at the end on how and what they find useful and were eager to use some also with students.

§ September, 2018: § The atmosphere was very positive..even though the teachers came after their

classes and were tired they were in the good mood …especially after the round, the connection was felt. By the fact that they have used several activities on their own it felt that the program was positively received. And that we are a group now.

§ December 2018§ The climate was positive, accepting, it is also a result of the last module and we

know each other well by now. It felt that the participants are relaxed to share their opinions, thoughts. Also at the end, there was a lot of gratitude and hugs and connection felt in the room.

Reflections on the interplay with students

§ Students being active, interested, engaged, curious etc..§ Classroom management. :

o Students participated and were engaged in all activities, however, as a group are quite loud and sometimes difficult to maintain their focus…

o …there were a few students that were disturbing most of the exercises. § Student perspective

o Today the students seemed to be under stress, probably due to tests and gradings.

§ Development over timeo The session as a whole went well, much better than module 2. Already when we

entered the school building some students were there and were excited to see us and were looking forward to what we will be doing … students came and eagerly volunteered to help (we had two boxes of yoga mats with us)

o This is a large student group with a wide variety of different students and attitudes. Nevertheless, they are successful in listening to each other and co-operate. Some students who did not want to participate earlier showed some curiosity today and partly participated in the exercises. It seems that they start to realize that it's voluntary and that it's perfectly ok to attend according to their own ability.

The trainer’s perceived learning outcomes: Some themes

§ Building trust over timeo Creation of the atmosphere of mutual trust, support and authenticity is the most

important element for the success of this program..§ Co-reflection with students to understand and support them

o ..at first, I was getting annoyed …thinking why …not following the instructions … then it hit me ..it is too challenging. Once I had this acceptance and compassion, everything was easy. We reflected together how this was difficult for them and verbalized strategies that would help

§ Co-reflection with school professionals in relation to student programo The importance of having a teacher or another person that knows the group

present.§ The teachers professional agency

o The idea of empowering their own capacities was new…...§ Relations with co-trainers

o It feels safe to work together and we can take turns and help each other§ Own professional agency

o That I can do it. That it was possible to lead a group and have the gear shift in the mind. That the exercises are well accepted even in the leaders’ group

Summing up: Key points & perspectives

§ Generic insights: o the implementation dynamics …. o ‘trust and contact’ are determent factorso related to the aims of the Hand in Hand

project – but also a more generic key-point in professional learning

§ The trainers’ confidence in relation to working in schools§ a multifaceted and sometimes challenging process -developing professional agency§ OBS: This is also the case for the teachers when implementing in the classroom

§ Examine multi-person systems of interactions when analysing the effects of reform initiatives Downes 2014

§ highlighting both individual and relational agency Edwards, 2009

§ Resist the temptation to “scale up” or mandate a particular format § without thoroughly examining the context in which it will be implemented§ learners (teachers) must want to improve their practice and see how this learning

opportunity will help them do so Calvert, 2016

References§ Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3,

77-101.§ Durlak, J.A. (2016). Programme implementation in social and emotional learning: basic issues and research

findings. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(3), 333-345.§ Durlak, J.A. & DuPre, E.P. (2008). Implementation Matters: A Review of Research on the Influence of

Implementation on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology 41, 327–350.

§ Downes, P. (2014). Conceptual Framework and Agenda: Beyond Bronfenbrenner (1979, 1995) to Interrogation of Blocked Systems via Structural Indicators. In P. Downes (Eds). Access to Education in Europe: A Framework and Agenda for System Change, 29-45. Dordrecht: Springer.

§ Edwards, A. (2009). Relational agency in collaborations for the well-being of children and young people. Journal of Children’s Services, 4(1), 33-43.

§ Goller, M. (2017). Human agency at work. Wiesbaden: Springer§ Jennings, P.A. and Greenberg, M. T. (2009). The prosocial Classroom: Teacher Social and Emotional

Competence in Relation to Student and Classroom Outcomes. Review of Educational Research 79 (1), 491-525.

§ Jones, S.M. & Bouffard, S.M (2012). Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies. Social Policy Report, 26(4), 1-33.

§ Lund, J.H. (2018). Introduktion til en general implementeringsramme – et planlængnings and process tool. CLOU skriftserie 2018, nr. 001, VIA University College

§ Nielsen, B.L. et al. (2019). Social emotional and intercultural competencies: a literature review with a particular focus on the school staff. European Journal of Teacher Education 42(3), 410-428.

§ Nielsen, B.L. (2020). Implementation of the Hand in Hand program for school staff and students. In A. Kozina(eds.)

§ Penuel, W.R., Fishman, B.J., Cheng, B.H. & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher 40(7), 331-337

§ Røvik, K.A.(2016). Knowledge Transfer as Translation: Review and Elements of an Instrumental Theory. International Journal of Management Reviews 18, 290–310

The endExtra slides that might be used for discussion follows

Levels of professional development evaluation

§ Different parts of the HAND in HAND evaluation have looked at what happens at different levels

1.Participants’ reactionsDid they like the program?Was their time well spent?

2.Participants learningDid they acquire the intended knowledge and skills?

3. Organization support and changeWas implemen-tation advoca-ted, facilitated and supported?

4.Participants use of new knowledge and skillsDid they effec-tively apply new knowledge and skills?

Based on Guskey, 2002: Evaluating Professional development

5. Student learning outcomesWhat was the impact on students?

Change in teachers’ beliefs

§ Sustainable change in teacher practices in general depends on a change in teachers' beliefs

§ Change in beliefs can often be initiated by seeing improvements in student learning outcomes (e.g. resulting from change in teaching practices Guskey, 2002

§ Several steps of translation/transitions o in the meeting between programme development and trainerso in the meetings between trainers and teachers (and/or

students) o in the meeting of teachers with students and/or colleagues.