Implementation of the Trauma-Sensitive Pedagogy Curriculum: A Pilot Study

• In Event: Trauma-Informed Practice as an Equitable Practice in Early Childhood Education

Abstract

Objectives/Purpose:
Trauma-informed approaches (TIA) in schools is underway to meet the health and academic needs of students who experience early adversity (Chafouleas et al., 2016). Schools that are trauma-informed integrate core elements of TIA (NCTSN, 2017). Despite such efforts, however, effectiveness of K-12 TIA remains weak (Herrenkohl et al., 2019). Moreover, most TIA intervention programs in schools typically employ professional development (PD) to increase knowledge about trauma without guidance from learning theories and implementation research to apply effective classroom strategies. Such limitations leave educators unprepared to address complexities surrounding the development and learning needs of students who experience trauma. Our study aimed to explore how integrating elements of effective PD within an implementation science framework can elucidate mechanisms to support the implementation and effectiveness of a TIA program, the Trauma Sensitive Pedagogy (TSP), in classrooms.

Perspective:
According to Stone (2019), early adversity is a “wicked” problem that defies pragmatic solutions because of complexity and lack of clear resolution. This is akin to ill-defined problems with conflicting assumptions, evidence, and opinions leading to different solutions (Schraw et al., 1995). As such, TSP was implemented as an action learning PD designed to address ill-defined problems where participants collaboratively work with actual problems across phases: problem identification, exploration, testing, monitoring, and problem reformulation (Lohman, 2002).

In order to examine the implementation process and how these relate to subsequent effectiveness, the conceptual model proposed by Proctor and colleagues (2009) was adapted and employed (see Fig. 2). Within this model, effectiveness of specific implementation strategies on knowledge and preparedness are mediated by specific implementation outcomes. Further, design and implementation of TSP included key elements for effective PD to ensure relevance for educators (Garet et al., 2016).

Methods:
Educators (n = 9) were recruited from an elementary school situated within a suburban, Mid-Atlantic community comprised of Latinx families from Central America. Participant included 2 classroom teachers, 1 SPLED teacher, 2 ESOL teachers, 1 paraeducator, 1 counselor, and 2 administrators. Educators participated in a 3-day summer institute with subsequent monthly team meetings with and without facilitators present across 12 months.

We employed the questionnaire variant of a convergent mixed methods design wherein quantitative and qualitative data were collected concurrently using a single questionnaire that included closed- and open-ended items (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).



Results:
Results in Table 1 highlight quantitative and qualitative responses to TSP program components mapped onto key features of effective PD and specific implementation outcomes. Descriptive results in Table 2 indicate gains in knowledge and preparedness before and after the 3-day summer workshop, with effectiveness sustained a year later.

Significance:
Findings from our pilot study show promising elements that may be important in translating trauma-informed knowledge into classroom practice. Given the lack of effective TIA in schools and classrooms, careful consideration of problem-based approaches and effective PD features should be included in TIA evaluation activities. Further, implementation of action learning as a problem-based approach shows promise as a strategy to promote problem-solving strategies that account for the complexities of trauma within the classroom.

Authors

• Carlomagno Panlilio, The Pennsylvania State University

• Christy Tirrell-Corbin, University of Maryland - College Park