8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 1/23
Professional Development in EmbeddedInstruction
A previous version of this presentation was delivered at the annual meeting ofthe American Educational Research Association
April 2011New Orleans, LA
Funded by the Institute of Education SciencesR324A070008
Mary McLean, Ph.D. - University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeePatricia Snyder, Ph.D. - University of Florida
Susan Sandall, Ph.D. - University of Washington
Mary Louise Hemmeter, Ph.D. - Vanderbilt University
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 2/23
Embedded InstructionMulti-component approach to provideintentional and systematic instruction
on priority learning targets
during typically occurringactivities, routines, and transitions
to supportchild engagement and learning
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 3/23
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 4/23
EC PD “Need” Relevantfor Present Study
• Descriptive studies have shown manyearly childhood practitioners do not feel – Competent
– Confident• To meet the needs of young children with
disabilities in inclusive learning contexts – Access – Participation
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 5/23
Theory of Change: Abbreviated
Teachers’
Frequent
and
Accurate
Use of
Embedded ‐
Instruction
Practices
Increased Child
Learning
Opportunities
Child
Engagement
and Learning
Workshops(high ‐ quality/
interactive)
Coaching(on ‐ site coaching
or self ‐ coaching)
P D I n t er v en t i on
Tool Kit(Multi‐ media
materials)
ContextualVariables
Instructional“Quality”
Instructional“Effectiveness”
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 6/23
Potential Efficacy Study
• Conducted in FL, WA, and WI
• 36 preschool teachers
– 3 sites – 11 to 13 teachers per site
• 106 children across 3 sites – 2-3 “target” children with disabilities in each
teacher’s classroom
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 7/23
Design• Teachers were randomly assigned to one of
three conditions at each site – Tools for Teachers workshops plus on-site coaching – Tools for Teachers workshops plus self-coaching – Wait-list comparison (control)
• Proximal outcome measures: 5 occasions – Before and after workshops – 2 nd month and 4 th month of coaching
– After intervention
• Distal outcome measures: pre and post – Before workshops
– After intervention
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 8/23
Teacher InformationOn ‐ site
Coaching
(n = 12)
Self ‐ Coaching(n = 12)
Control(n = 12)
Female 12 12 11Race White/Non ‐ Hispanic
African American
Hispanic
Other a
8 10 9
1 0 2
1 1 0
2 1 1
Education BachelorMaster
6 9 8
6 3 4b
ECSE
Trainc
YesNo 9 8 92 4 3
Yrs.Experience in EC
M = 9.3 M = 6 M = 7.5
SD = 6.0 SD = 4.0 SD = 4.2
8
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 9/23
Child Information
On ‐ site Coaching
(n = 35)
Self ‐ Coaching
(n = 36)
Control
(n = 35)
Gender30 males5 females
25 males11 females
27 males8 females
Mean Age in Mos.(SD)
48.6(8.7)
46.8(8.1)
52.7(8.4)
Mean ABILITIES Index score (SD)
1.8
(.5)
1.7
(.4)
1.7
(.6)
9
All participating children were identified with disabilities thatqualified them to receive education and related services underSection 619 of IDEA.
All children enrolled in the study had IEP
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 10/23
Primary Research Questions• What is the relationship between exposure to PD intervention and
teachers’ frequent and accurate use of embedded-instructionpractices? – Developing quality learning targets (LTRS) – Implementing planned learning opportunities (EIOS) – Delivering complete learning trials (EIOS)
• Do scores on standardized measures of key preschool indicators(pre-academic, literacy, language, and social-emotional behavior)differ among children whose teachers were involved in each of the
three experimental PD conditions?
• What are teachers’ perspectives about embedded instruction andthe professional development they received?
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 11/23
• Teachers in both PD experimental conditions received: – 16.5 hours of workshops
– Implementation guides and materials – Digital video camera
• On-site coaching – Observation, debrief, and email feedback – Mean # sessions = 16 – Mean duration of observation = 73.9 min ( SD = 19.5) – Mean duration of debrief = 39.3 min ( SD = 12.1)
• Web-based coaching*• Wait-list control teachers received workshops,
implementation guides, digital video camera and accessto web site at end of study
Experimental Intervention
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 12/23
• Workshop Implementation Guides
• Workshop Fidelity Checklist – 96.8% (range = 93.6% -99.4%)
• Instructional Strategies Used by Trainer
• Time Allocated versus Time Spent
Procedural Fidelity:Workshops
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 13/23
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 14/23
• Fidelity self-coaching orientation session
– 97.2% (range 91.7%-100%)
• Fidelity weekly e-mail reminder to teachersin the self-coaching condition – 100%
Procedural Fidelity:Self-Coaching
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 15/23
Select Findings
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 16/23
Coaching Strategies: Observation
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 17/23
Coaching Strategies: Debrief
17
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 18/23
Self-Coaching and Website Use# of visits
every 2weeks a
Average timeon site pervisit b (min)
# of actionplans
submitted c
# of formsuploaded to
the site
Self-coaching
videosubmitted
High Users
Teacher A 1.6 36 3 9 Yes
Teacher B 1.6 19 4 16 YesModerateUsers
Teacher C .6 54 0 4 No
Teacher D 1.2 19 1 0 Yes
Teacher E .6 42 1 0 Yes
Teacher F .4 13 1 0 Yes
Teacher G .4 34 2 1 YesTeacher H 1.2 27 0 0 No
Teacher I .2 42 0 6 No
Low Users
Teacher J 0 n/a 0 0 No
Teacher K 0 n/a 0 0 No18
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 19/23
Teacher Implementation Data
Note. LTRS Total Score represents percentage of quality indicators. EIOS scores measured as ratebased on number of trials implemented for a child on one learning target every 15 min. On average,
teachers implemented trials for 2-3 children with 2-3 learning targets for each child.* Refers to statistically significant main effect at p < .05
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 20/23
EIOS: Teacher Implementation
“Embedded” Complete Learning Trials
20
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 21/23
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 22/23
Social Validity Data:
PD Intervention
8/6/2019 Professional Development in Embedded Instruction
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professional-development-in-embedded-instruction 23/23
• Limitations – A priori power analyses based on alpha .20 – Standardized and decontextualized child outcome measures – Metrics used to evaluate “dosage” of self-coaching
• Implications – High-quality workshops sufficient for improving quality
of learning targets – On-site coaching to improve frequency and accuracy
of embedded instruction learning trials
– Different implementation supports for differentcomponents of embedded instruction – Social validity data strong, particularly for workshops
plus on-site coaching
Limitations and Implications