Working Together: Leveraging Teacher Study Groups to Improve Social and Emotional Learning in the Classroom

Abstract

Teachers of students with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) may face obstacles and feel isolated when implementing social and emotional learning (SEL) programming with students. The teacher study group (TSG) offers an effective way to overcome barriers and improve SEL. These groups provide a gathering space for teachers to investigate problems of practice, celebrate points of pride, and strengthen professional learning in a focused area. In this article, we summarize existing research on SEL and TSGs and describe available SEL programs that incorporate TSGs. We provide an example of SEL-focused TSGs in practice, offering guidance and tips for early elementary school teachers—and the administrators who support them—who work with students with or at risk for EBD.

Keywords

professional development teacher study groups coaching social and emotional learning emotional and behavioral disorders

Ms. Carpenter manages a second-grade general education class of 30 students. Several students with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) frequently disrupt the class by being negative, being uncooperative, or not following directions. Their behavior angers classmates and creates stress for the teacher, while the whole class falls behind academically. Ms. Carpenter feels alone in dealing with these problems. She has heard that instruction in social and emotional learning (SEL) can help disruptive students improve their behavior, and foster a better classroom climate, but she has received no training in SEL and does not know where to turn for support. After 3 years as a teacher, she is burned out.

This scenario is common and not limited to isolated groups or classrooms. Rather, it reflects the day-to-day reality confronting many teachers and students across diverse settings. In this article, we offer guidance for early elementary school teachers and their administrators to help them overcome the challenges that exist in teaching SEL skills to students with or at risk for EBD. We begin with a description of SEL. We then list challenges experienced by teachers in implementing SEL programming and describe how teacher study groups (TSGs) can be implemented to address obstacles and improve SEL. We briefly describe available SEL programs that incorporate TSGs. We then provide an example of SEL-focused TSGs in practice from one of these programs—Social and Emotional Learning Study Groups+ for Educators of Students with EBD (SELSG+). The vignette is intended to help busy early elementary grade teachers see how they can successfully incorporate SEL instruction with TSGs into their current schedules and settings.

Heightened Social and Emotional Learning Challenges

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (2009) estimated that one in five youth had been diagnosed with, or were at risk for, EBD, indicating a need for SEL development among a wide range of students. The pandemic heightened this issue (Galea et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2020) as the number of mental health-related emergency room visits in 2020 increased by 25% over the previous year among children ages 5 to 11 years (Leeb et al., 2020).

According to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL, 2022), SEL is defined as the process through which students “acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions.” Development of SEL skills is critical for success in school and life (Melnick & Martinez, 2019). To improve academic and behavioral outcomes for students, educators must be equipped with the knowledge and skills to differentiate SEL instruction based on individual needs (Nelson et al., 2008).

However, teacher preparation programs, in general and special education, provide little or no SEL instruction (Schonert-Reichl et al., 2017) or classroom management. Teacher education candidates receive an average of 8 hr of training on effective SEL strategies, and even less on how to differentiate instruction for youth with social and behavioral health concerns (Greenberg, Walsh et al., 2014). Ongoing training regarding SEL for inservice teachers, while crucial, is often lacking or delivered as a one-time approach (Jennings & Frank, 2015; Murano et al., 2019). Even though federal laws mandate appropriate instruction for students with disabilities (IDEA; U.S., 2004), educators feel unprepared to provide explicit, differentiated SEL instruction, particularly for students with or at risk for EBD (State et al., 2019).

Improvement in social and emotional skills benefits all students. It is especially important for students with or at risk for EBD because their social and emotional difficulties often lead to negative educational and life outcomes (e.g., Gresham, 2015; Kramer et al., 2014). As more than 80% of these students are served in general education classrooms (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, 2022), general and special educators need practical, research- or evidence-based approaches to meet these students’ individual learning and behavioral needs.

Teachers of students with or at risk for EBD experience high stress and burnout (Brunsting et al., 2014, 2022) and often leave their positions (Gilmour & Wehby, 2020). Fifty-eight percent of current teachers report burnout, with the percentage higher for teachers who work with challenging students (Wheelock College of Education and Human Development, 2021). These teachers also have lower self-efficacy—less belief in their abilities to manage classroom behavior (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Disruptive classroom behaviors are a major source of teacher stress, job dissatisfaction, and attrition (Haydon et al., 2019).

Professional Development and Teacher Study Groups

Developing student SEL can improve these student behaviors. Therefore, researchers and practitioners are seeking new ways to help teachers become proficient in fostering prosocial SEL. Professional development has been shown in meta-analyses to improve student outcomes (Didion et al., 2020). Professional development holds promise for enhancing the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with or at risk for EBD. Teacher professional development, whether in the form of courses, workshops, conferences, or formal and informal learning communities, can provide opportunities for educators to improve their knowledge, skills, and teaching practice (Kennedy, 2016).

Teacher study groups are grounded in research on professional learning and validated models of professional development (Cunningham et al., 2015; Garrett et al., 2019; Kraft et al., 2018). For professional development to be effective, instruction for teachers must be linked directly to improving student outcomes (Desimone & Garet, 2015). Educators should also be given a clear rationale for the use of research-based practices and shown how to apply instructional practices, immediately and directly, in the classroom (Desimone & Garet, 2015; Greenberg, Putman et al., 2014). Professional development is more effective when practices are modeled and educators are actively engaged in learning (Garrett et al., 2019). Program duration must be enough to have significant and sustained impacts on teacher practice (Desimone & Garet, 2015).

Teacher coaching is a key component of professional development. In a meta-analysis of 60 studies, Kraft and colleagues (2018) reported that educator coaching had moderate, educationally meaningful, and statistically significant effects on educator instruction and student achievement. In another meta-analytic investigation, Garrett et al. (2019) reported that the 33 interventions which included an individualized coaching component produced the largest impacts. Individual, peer-to-peer, and group coaching have been successfully incorporated in the design and delivery of TSGs (e.g., Reiser et al., 2017).

The goal of TSGs is to provide collaborative peer support to educators to help strengthen their professional knowledge—in this case, of SEL instructional practices—and facilitate the successful transfer of the knowledge gained to their classroom practice. Teacher study groups are designed to provide teachers the space to collaborate, discuss, reflect, and give and receive personalized coaching (Blitz, 2013). A previous design experiment of the TSG model demonstrated its positive effects on teacher and student outcomes (Cunningham et al., 2015). In prior studies for SEL interventions, in-person TSG protocols were shown to be effective in building and sustaining teacher classroom management skills (Benner et al., 2012, 2013; Benner, Filderman et al., 2022; Benner, Strycker et al., 2022). Moreover, TSGs that incorporate online programming can help reduce barriers to participation, such as time and distance, and offer convenient training opportunities to build SEL knowledge. Through on-site or online TSGs, teachers support each other in learning and then transferring knowledge to classroom practice.

Empirical research on TSGs has focused on both academics and behavioral supports. Researchers have found TSGs to be effective in improving K–12 teacher knowledge and skills in science, literacy, writing, math, behavioral supports, and music education (Firestone et al., 2020). Teacher study groups have been used to build capacity of both preservice and inservice educators. Researchers have used TSGs to increase educator efficacy to provide effective behavioral supports, including SEL (Meyers et al., 1997).

In an integrative review of TSGs, mostly at the elementary level, Firestone and colleagues (2020) analyzed 32 studies with varying research designs (e.g., mixed methods, quantitative, qualitative). Findings showed that teachers improved their knowledge and that teacher practice and student outcomes improved in some, but not all, studies included in the review. Benner and colleagues conducted a feasibility study (Benner, Strycker et al., 2022) and a randomized controlled trial (Benner, Filderman et al., 2022) investigating the impacts of digitally delivered TSGs with a sample of elementary teachers of students with or at risk for EBD. The major takeaways were that (a) TSG teachers were more confident in classroom management, instructional strategies, and student engagement and (b) students with or at risk for EBD served by participating TSG teachers made significant improvements in academic competence, including academic skills and enablers (i.e., motivation, engagement, interpersonal skills, and study skills). On the Academic Competence Evaluation Scales (ACES; DiPerna & Elliott, 2002), TSG students improved SEL behaviors conducive to learning compared with control students whose SEL scores did not change (Benner, Filderman et al., 2022).

Available Social and Emotional Learning Programs Incorporating Teacher Study Groups

Table 1 summarizes four available SEL programs incorporating TSGs, along with their evidence bases. The Integrated Literacy Study Group/SELSG+ (Benner, Strycker et al., 2022), designed to train teachers on systematic reading instruction and behavioral strategies for students with or at risk for EBD, features both in-person and online TSGs for reflection, coaching, and collaboration. The Making the Most of Classroom Interactions program (Early et al., 2017) aims to train instructors for effective teacher–student interactions and incorporates TSGs for instructional support. The goal of the Researcher-Developed Teacher Study Group project (Cunningham et al., 2015) is to provide academic content training for teachers, with twice-monthly TSGs for review, content presentation, practice, and preparation. The Teacher Study Group Professional Development program (Gersten et al., 2010), used in conjunction with schoolwide professional development to improve vocabulary and reading instruction, includes TSGs to help teachers debrief and plan collaboratively. Each program has demonstrated significant improvement in targeted outcomes, pointing to the effectiveness of TSGs.

Table 1.

Available Social and Emotional Learning Programs Incorporating Teacher Study Groups.

Program name	Program description	Evidence base (citation)	Use of teacher study groups
Integrated Literacy Study Group (ILSG); Social and Emotional Learning Study Groups+ for Educators of Students with EBD (SELSG+)	Web-based professional learning to train teachers on systematic reading instruction and behavioral strategies for students with or at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders	Significant improvements in teacher self-efficacy as well as student reading and behavioral competency (Benner, Strycker et al., 2022)	Both in-person and online teacher study groups used for reflection, coaching, and collaboration
Making the Most of Classroom Interactions (MMCI)	Teacher group meetings with trained instructors targeting effective teacher–student interactions	Significant increases in emotional support and instructional support, as well as marginal improvement in classroom organization (Early et al., 2017)	Meetings of small teacher groups focused on instructional support
Researcher-Developed Teacher Study Group	Academic content training combined with teacher study groups	Significant gains in teacher content and procedural knowledge (Cunningham et al., 2015)	Twice-monthly meetings of teacher study groups with time for review, content presentation, practice, and preparation
Teacher Study Group Professional Development	Small-group teacher study groups used in conjunction with schoolwide professional development targeting vocabulary and reading instruction	Significant improvement in teachers’ instructional techniques (Gersten et al., 2010)	Informal small-group meetings following a four-step process: (1) debrief previous application of the research, (2) walk through the research, (3) walk through the lesson, and (4) collaborative planning

A Practical Example of Social and Emotional Learning-Focused Teacher Study Groups: SELSG+

Like the teachers in the scenario, most early elementary educators, special and general educators alike, are ill-equipped to deliver SEL instruction to their students—especially those with or at risk for EBD. The section below uses one available SEL program (SELSG+) as an example to show how SEL-focused TSGs and coaching may help educate and support teachers in implementing SEL strategies in the classroom.

SELSG+ Overview

SELSG+ is a hybrid-delivered teacher professional development and student curriculum package for early elementary educators. It is designed to provide effective, multitiered, research- or evidence-based SEL instruction to all learners in Grades K–3 (Tier 1), including those with or at risk for EBD (Tier 2 and Tier 3). The program targets Grades K–3 because the early elementary years present an especially critical and malleable period for students to learn to interact with others, develop positive attitudes about schoolwork, engage in behaviors that support critical thinking, maintain focus, and cope with frustration (Mondi et al., 2021).

SELSG+ is composed of the following digital resources: (a) research-based professional learning opportunities and resources for teachers, including a 12-module online training course (about 24 hr of instruction) to prepare educators to implement SEL with students; (b) a research-based, 8-week, Tier 1 video-based SEL curriculum for all students in Grades K–3; (c) SEL assessments for teachers to identify students who need Tier 2 or Tier 3 intervention, such as those with or at risk for EBD, and monitor student progress; and (d) a flexible, research-based Tier 2 and Tier 3 SEL curriculum delivered in small groups or individually and tailored to students’ needs. These components are supported by in-person and web-facilitated TSGs and personalized coaching.

Educators access SELSG+ via a secure website that includes the teacher training course, protocols and virtual access for TSGs and personalized coaching, student curriculum materials, teacher curriculum guides, and instruments to identify student needs and measure student progress. Digitally delivered professional learning has emerged as a viable alternative to traditional professional learning activities, with comparable or better results than face-to-face training (Lay et al., 2020). The appeal of web-based delivery of professional learning includes flexibility and convenience, the ability to tailor the pace to fit individual or group needs, access to resources not locally available, and extended opportunities for learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017).

Professional Learning Supported by Peers

A meta-analysis of SEL explicit and systematic programs demonstrated that the quality of implementation affects program outcomes (Durlak et al., 2011), with effective implementation leading to better student outcomes (Jones et al., 2018). Thus, TSGs should follow research- or evidence-based best practices to ensure high-quality program implementation. The challenge for educators is to create a professional learning experience that is sequential, active, focused, and explicit, with teachers learning and practicing new skills as they proceed with implementation.

Before implementing Tier 2 SEL supports (Algozzine et al., 2019), TSGs are encouraged to assess the degree to which the school’s existing professional development program prepares teachers to deliver the intervention. This assessment can be achieved with the Professional Development feature (2.9) of the Tiered Fidelity Inventory (https://www.pbis.org/resource/tfi). On this inventory, TSGs rate the degree of Tier 2 SEL professional development implemented in their school as 0 (no process for teaching staff in place), 1 (professional development and orientation process is informal), or 2 (written process used to teach and coach all relevant staff in all aspects of intervention delivery, including request for assistance process, using progress report as an instructional prompt, delivering feedback, and monitoring student progress). Using the data, TSGs evaluate current Tier 2 SEL professional development activities in their school and plan areas for improvement.

The SELSG+ professional learning component is an online course. It guides educators through 12 modules (see Table 2) to help them learn, reflect, and implement the featured SEL content and assess student progress. Incorporating essential elements for high-quality professional learning (DeMonte, 2013), the course content is linked to student outcomes and integrates knowledge types by having educators: (a) learn about and discuss research-based SEL instructional and assessment practices, (b) change existing instructional practices to align with the research base, and (c) rehearse how to implement these practices in their classrooms. The course also includes video modeling to support teachers’ skill acquisition and appropriate use in teacher–child interactions (Bandura, 1986).

Table 2.

Educator Learning Objectives for the Social and Emotional Learning Study Groups+ for Educators of Students with EBD Online Course.

Topic	Educator learning objectives
Module 1: Introduction to social and emotional learning (SEL) instruction	• Explain the importance of SEL for elementary youth. • Explain the importance of SEL in my life (professional and personal). • Identify a personal reason for adjusting my teaching routines. • Articulate state and district SEL learning standards and benchmarks.
Module 2: Multitiered prevention and how to effectively implement in our school	• Explain multitiered prevention. • Describe implementation science. • Compare research-based SEL interventions. • Describe an effective teacher study group.
Module 3: Implementing the We Have Skills! (WHS) student curriculum	• Describe the skills included in WHS. • Deliver the WHS curriculum to my students. • Explain the three legs of the SEL instructional stool. • Deliver explicit SEL instruction.
Module 4: Key SEL infusion strategies	• Create routines for signature SEL infusion strategies. • Deliver signature SEL infusion strategies with my students. • Implement classroom circles with my students. • Implement emotion checks and management strategies classwide and with myself. • Create warm welcome and optimistic closure routines. • Create classroom break space and routine with my students.
Module 5: Understanding social and emotional strengths and needs	• Describe my social and emotional strengths to my students. • Practice regularly checking my emotions and recognizing them. • Apply social perspective, taking in my personal and professional life. • Model self-control to my students. • Model social problem-solving to my students.
Module 6: Data-based differentiation through SEL assessment	• Explain data-based differentiation. • Describe the benefits of differentiation. • Show how social and emotional strengths and needs related to specific skills are to be taught. • Demonstrate how to use the online assessment tools.
Module 7: Teaching skillstreaming	• Show my ability to model skills. • Demonstrate my ability to initiate and sustain role-playing. • Deliver appropriate performance feedback. • Provide examples of how to teach generalization. • Demonstrate good process skills. • Develop a sample teaching agenda for a lesson.
Module 8: Implementing skillstreaming	• Explain how to manage problem behaviors in small groups. • Discuss how to reinforce skill use.
Module 9: Skills for self-awareness and self-control	• Demonstrate knowledge of relevant skills. • Apply skills in a sample lesson. • Demonstrate function-based Tier 2 supports. • Show ability to use key strategies: Mo Breaks, Calm Camp.
Module 10: Skills for perspective taking and emotion recognition	• Demonstrate knowledge of relevant skills. • Apply skills in a sample lesson. • Demonstrate function-based Tier 2 supports. • Show ability to use key strategies: Check-in/Check-out, Restorative Circles.
Module 11: Skills for skill cluster and social problem-solving	• Demonstrate knowledge of relevant skills. • Apply skills in a sample lesson. • Demonstrate function-based Tier 2 supports. • Show ability to use key strategies: Youth Leadership Menu, Reset.
Module 12: Progress monitoring and putting it all together	• Use progress monitoring data to determine responsiveness to differentiated SEL supports. • Provide data-based individualization to students who need it. • Assess our system for advanced tiers of support.

Note. EBD = emotional and behavioral disorders.

While completing the course, SELSG+ encourages teachers to engage in interactive practice and receive coaching feedback through TSGs. In this way, TSGs enhance instruction and learning transfer (Joyce & Showers, 2002). The use of TSGs is a research-based professional development approach for building teacher capacity for effective classroom practices (Cunningham et al., 2015; Jayanthi et al., 2018). Research shows that online collaborative teacher professional learning groups are better than in-person groups for engaging participants in reflective practice (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Lay et al., 2020). The asynchronous nature of the SELSG+ course allows educators to increase duration and intensity based on their own personal professional development needs (Yoon et al., 2020). Teacher study groups support teachers working toward mastery prior to implementing the multitiered student curriculum. Most schools already have grade-level teams with common weekly planning time to participate in professional learning communities. SELSG+ TSGs fit into this existing framework. Teacher study groups may meet in person or virtually to provide feedback on teaching learning and practice.

In SELSG+, teachers may coach each other in TSGs. There is empirical support for peer coaching within groups of teachers having different strengths and weaknesses (Papay et al., 2016; Rock, 2019a, 2019b). In addition, SELSG+ teachers may request personalized coaching. Virtual coaches provide individualized feedback and additional opportunities to practice skills, both of which have been demonstrated to improve implementation, instruction, and student outcomes (Joyce & Showers, 2002; Kraft et al., 2018; Rock et al., 2013, 2014). Coaching may be requested directly on the SELSG+ web interface. It is delivered by trained instructors through written messages and phone and video calls.

Effective, Research-Based Tier 1 Social and Emotional Learning Instruction for All Students

Researchers at Harvard University’s Ecological Approaches to Social Emotional Learning Laboratory (Jones et al., 2021) identified 33 research-based SEL programs that can be implemented as Tier 1 curricula. In SELSG+, teachers deliver universal SEL instruction digitally using one of the research-based programs, the We Have Skills! Tier 1 curriculum (Marquez et al., 2014). Through virtual and in-person TSGs, teachers provide continuous support to each other as they implement the Tier 1 curriculum with students. We Have Skills! is a print- and video-based program designed to teach SEL skills to students in Grades K–3. It consists of two core components: (a) an 8-week video curriculum with classroom materials and (b) a 40-page printed Teacher Curriculum Guide.

The curriculum includes eight 30-min classroom lessons, practice exercises, and take-home materials. The first lesson defines classroom behavioral skills and explains their importance. The remaining lessons teach seven core behavioral skills derived from research (Hersh & Walker, 1983; Walker & Rankin, 1983): (a) listen, (b) ask for help, (c) follow directions, (d) do the best you can, (e) follow the rules, (f) work out strong feelings, and (g) get along. Classroom instruction includes daily practice through problem-solving discussions, role plays, and games, and review of skills during activities like classroom instruction, independent work, and transitions. Educators give students independent activities that reinforce the skills and lessons learned in class and send home parent materials to support learning goals.

In addition to implementing the curriculum, SELSG+ teachers are encouraged to collaborate through their TSGs to incorporate research-based SEL and behavioral “kernels” in their classrooms. Kernels are activities shown to change behavior (Bailey et al., 2019; Jones & Bouffard, 2012) and are common in widely adopted social and behavioral interventions to improve student outcomes. SELSG+ offers a range of strategies to help teachers identify the most appropriate kernel for a given student and situation. Strategies include routines for teaching clear behavioral expectations, responding to unwanted student behavior, organizing the learning environment, and maximizing engagement.

Data-Based Social and Emotional Learning Assessments for Tier 2 and Tier 3 Screening and Progress Monitoring

Central to effective implementation of multitiered prevention systems is accurate identification of the intensity of support necessary to meet student needs. Universal screening data can be used to identify areas of SEL strength and need. Screening is the essential first step toward addressing the SEL requirements of youth with or at risk for EBD in need of Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention. The importance of screening cannot be overstated. Without screening information, teachers and students are destined to face frustration. For instance, students with or at risk for EBD may continue to struggle in a SEL skill, such as self-management—despite being asked repeatedly to demonstrate it—either because the task is too hard or too easy. Teachers who devote time to screening students have a better understanding of SEL strengths and deficits.

Teacher study groups can prepare to implement Tier 2 SEL supports (Algozzine et al., 2019) by completing the first four features of the Tiered Fidelity Inventory: (2.1) Team Composition, (2.2) Team Operating Procedures, (2.3) Screening, and (2.4) Request for Assistance (2.4). On each feature, TSGs rate the degree of implementation as 2 (fully implemented), 1 (partially implemented), or 0 (not implemented). With this instrument, TSGs assess Tier 2 SEL implementation in their school and plan areas for improvement.

SELSG+ TSGs focus on two types of SEL assessments: screening to make informed decisions (see Tiered Fidelity Inventory feature 2.3) and progress monitoring of those identified as in need of additional support. A number of reliable and valid SEL screening and progress monitoring tools are available, listed in the Best Practices in Universal Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Screening: An Implementation Guide (https://smhcollaborative.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/universalscreening.pdf) (Romer et al., 2020) as well as the National Center on Intensive Intervention Behavior Screening Tools Chart (https://intensiveintervention.org/).

To make the data-gathering process easier for TSGs, the SELSG+ digital platform provides student assessments of social and emotional skills to facilitate assignment to Tier 2 intervention. The website also offers simple teacher progress monitoring measures for all students, with more frequent monitoring recommended for those receiving targeted small group or individual instruction. The data-based differentiation approach promoted by SELSG+ is supported by strong evidence from a What Works Clearinghouse practice guide, Reducing Behavior Problems in the Elementary Classroom (Epstein et al., 2008).

For screening, SELSG+ incorporates SELweb EE, a web-based tool to assess social-emotional comprehension for K–3 students (xSEL Labs, 2020). SELweb is a child-friendly, digitally delivered 25-min assessment designed for independent student use without staff assistance on a computer or tablet. Based on a previous model of social-emotional comprehension (Lipton & Nowicki, 2009), SELweb assesses four dimensions: social awareness, social meaning, social reasoning, and social control (see Table 3). Across two studies with a large ethnically and socioeconomically diverse sample, the measure reports high internal consistency reliability, a theoretically coherent four-factor model, and convergent and discriminant validity (McKown, 2019; McKown, Russo-Ponsaran, Allen, et al., 2016; McKown, Russo-Ponsaran, Johnson, et al., 2016).

Table 3.

Four Dimensions of SELweb (From SELSG+ Online Course Module 6).

SELweb dimension	Description
Social awareness	Understanding others’ emotions
Social meaning	Interpreting others’ mental states
Social reasoning	Reasoning about social problems
Social control	Delaying gratification and controlling emotions toward goal attainment

Note. SELSG+ = Social and Emotional Learning Study Groups+ for Educators of Students with EBD; EBD = emotional and behavioral disorders.

Based on results from SELweb and the Elementary Social Behavior Assessment (ESBA; Pennefather & Smolkowski, 2015; described below), plus additional data from direct observation, skill checklists, and other sources, teachers can group students deficient in particular skills for Tier 2 intervention. The 12-module online SELSG+ course shows educators how to effectively select and apply differentiated research-based SEL skills aligned to the five CASEL core competencies. Module 6 focuses on data-based differentiation through SEL assessment (see Supplemental Material to view Module 6 course content and examples of assessment instruments). Course modules focusing on Tier 2 assessment and implementation show teachers how to administer assessments, interpret results using data reports, and combine these results with additional data. The SELSG+ platform enables student grouping through visualization of data and identification of students with similar patterns of strengths and deficiencies. Teachers can view this information in grade-level or Tier 2 TSGs to efficiently and effectively sort students for small group and individual instruction.

As part of SELSG+, teachers monitor student progress using the ESBA, a teacher-report of student social and emotional skills (Pennefather & Smolkowski, 2015). This instrument was developed to assess the skills teachers report as important in students (Walker et al., 2015). It allows teachers to screen an entire class and monitor progress of individual students on their use of prosocial behaviors in the classroom. Teachers rate students’ engagement in positive behaviors on 12 items: (a) listens to and respects the teacher, (b) follows teacher directions, (c) works with effort, (d) does seatwork as directed, (e) asks for help appropriately, (f) follows classroom rules, (g) avoids breaking rules even when encouraged by a peer, (h) behaves appropriately outside the classroom, (i) works out strong feelings appropriately, (j) can have “normal” conversation without becoming hostile, (k) gets along with peers, and (l) resolves peer conflicts adequately without teacher assistance. The items were derived from research by Walker and Rankin (1983). SELSG+ offers SimpleScreener, a digital, user-friendly assessment tool with data visualization. The information can also be exported to other data systems. With SimpleScreener, educators can establish baseline data for a class and quickly assess response to intervention and measure improvement for students receiving Tier 2 instruction.

The final four Tier 2 features of the Tiered Fidelity Inventory are useful for TSGs to monitor progress and examine the effectiveness of Tier 2 SEL supports (Algozzine et al., 2019): (2.10) Level of Use, (2.11) Student Performance Data, (2.12) Fidelity Data, and (2.13) Annual Evaluation. Ratings on these features inform TSGs of the degree to which Tier 2 SEL supports are being implemented in their school and identify areas for improvement.

Research-Based Tier 2 and Tier 3 Intervention

When preparing to implement Tier 2 and Tier 3 SEL supports, TSGs may be guided by four relevant features of the Tiered Fidelity Inventory (Algozzine et al., 2019): (2.5) Options for Tier 2 Interventions, (2.6) Tier 2 Critical Features, (2.7) Practices Matched to Student Need, and (2.8) Access to Tier 1 Supports. With Tiered Fidelity Inventory data, TSGs can assess the degree to which Tier 2 SEL intervention supports are being implemented in their school and identify areas to improve.

It is not easy for TSGs to choose Tier 2 SEL interventions because most programs are intended either for all students (Tier 1) or for students in need of more intensive Tier 2 and Tier 3 supports. To make the process easier, the SELSG+ platform offers teachers a digitally delivered Tier 2 SEL student curriculum. Teachers can select research-based SEL skills lessons to use with small groups and individual students to address social and emotional skills deficits. SELSG+ uses Skillstreaming the Elementary Child (McGinnis & Goldstein, 2003)—a widely adopted Tier 2 social skills training program that targets: (a) classroom survival skills, (b) friendship-making skills, (c) skills for dealing with feelings, (d) skill alternatives to aggression, and (e) skills for dealing with stress. Students learn these skills through an explicit instruction process that includes teacher modeling, role playing, provision of performance feedback, and generalization training.

The Skillstreaming program has considerable research supporting its use to teach SEL skills (e.g., Kocaoz et al., 2019; Kolbe-Holden, 2017; Sheridan et al., 2011). As a SELSG+ Tier 2 component, Skillstreaming is flexible, allowing for the differentiation and individualization of programming. Only skills (out of 60 available) in which students are deficient are taught and pacing through the curriculum is adjusted to meet individual needs. The program has been adapted for a range of students with and without disabilities. The program is socially valid and easily implemented and has also been shown to be efficacious for K–3 youth with or at risk for EBD (Zigler et al., 1992). Skillstreaming is designed for collaboration, using an instructional format that encourages family and teacher engagement (McGinnis & Goldstein, 2003). Finally, it is well aligned with WHS (We Have Skills!) in its use of collaboration, learning procedures, modeling, role-playing, feedback, and skill development.

The SELSG+ online assessment system automatically routes students in need of Tier 2 SEL supports into one of four SEL instructional groups: (a) classroom survival, (b) friendship making, (c) dealing with feelings, and (d) dealing with stress. With progress monitoring data, TSGs can track daily SEL growth (mastery) of the key skills taught within each of the four SEL instructional groups. Teacher study group teams can use data to adjust and differentiate for each youth or the whole group. This makes it easy for educators to know how well students are mastering the skills and whether to reteach skills. Educators use drag-and-drop features on the SELSG+ platform to rearrange the order of intervention components to better meet the context and student instructional needs. Teachers may add and remove skills as needed. SELSG+ guides teachers in their instruction with a small group, providing digital instructional materials such as skill outlines and modeling videos, and offering printable student skill cards and resources for parents.

To promote SEL instruction and a positive school environment, Ms. Carpenter and her colleagues decided to create a SEL-specific TSG. As the teachers were trained to deliver classroom SEL instruction, they developed and practiced new skills in their TSG. The TSG then supported Ms. Carpenter and her coworkers as they delivered SEL instruction in their classrooms. Because of busy schedules, the teachers could not always meet in person. Instead, they used their electronic devices at their convenience to tap into online TSG and coaching support. Each week, TSG members used discussion forums to communicate with each other. Ms. Carpenter also requested peer coaching from TSG members and personalized coaching from a virtual coach to help her find solutions when specific challenges arose with individual students. The web-based interface enabled Ms. Carpenter and her colleagues to efficiently learn and work collaboratively, reflect on their current practices, plan implementation of the SEL strategies, and give and receive practical and timely feedback.

Six months after setting up the SEL-focused TSG, Ms. Carpenter is less stressed, more confident in managing her classroom, and more satisfied with her job. The TSG support and personalized coaching sessions really helped. She thought connecting and learning from other teachers was the most enjoyable aspect of the program. She found the study group and peer support format extremely helpful to understanding, implementing, and troubleshooting research-based SEL strategies in her classroom. Ms. Carpenter still faces student problem behavior challenges, but she feels well-equipped and well-supported to deal with them. With fewer students misbehaving and less tension overall, her class is now a place where all students are better able to learn and grow.

Final Thoughts

In this article, we documented the importance of SEL in the classroom, emphasizing its utility in working with students with or at risk for EBD. We presented TSGs as a research-based professional development approach for improving SEL and enhancing student behavioral and academic outcomes. To support busy early elementary school teachers and administrators in carrying out TSGs, we described implementation of a research-based SEL curriculum within a multitiered prevention framework in a K–3 setting. Table 4 includes additional tips for implementing effective SEL-based TSGs.

Table 4

Tips for Implementing Effective Teacher Study Groups (TSGs) for Social and Emotional Learning (SEL).

Tip	Evidence base (citations)	Practical strategies
Transform counterproductive discussion	Suh (2020) emphasized the importance of intentionally attending to collegial interactions.	• Avoid romanticized notions about working together. • Reframe any discussions of what students cannot do (venting and lamenting) to instead explore what teachers can do to promote SEL and academic growth in the classroom (encouraging positive ideas). • Emphasize both SEL and academic development. • Strive to be self-critical and self-reflective. • Recognize counterproductive discussion and create space for productive discussion.
Support learning by respecting wisdom and exploring new insights	Bullough and Smith (2016) advised groups to work toward positive change for students. Vangrieken et al. (2017) recommended attention to group dynamics.	• Recognize that TSGs are not foolproof—they do not guarantee professional learning and growth. • Work together to promote positive changes in SEL and academic instruction and outcomes for students. • Resist drifting and languishing in the status quo. • Routinely attend to shared norms, interpersonal dynamics, and effective conflict negotiation. • Facilitate discussion that respects the group’s wisdom and encourages new insights regarding SEL and classroom instruction.
Negotiate tensions and support coaches	Cunningham et al. (2015) noted tensions that may arise due to differences in knowledge and preferences. Ostovar-Nameghi and Sheikhahmadi (2016) advised alignment with existing professional development programs. Clair (1998) focused on emotional and physical fatigue, and other challenges of TSGs.	• Plan how to build teacher knowledge about SEL, which often varies greatly. • Clarify group members’ preferred ways of working with each other (e.g., learning together, taking responsibility for the group). • Outline how the group will handle teachers’ and students’ strengths and needs. • To avoid conflicts with other initiatives, explicitly connect the group’s SEL focus with other state, district, or school-based professional development. • Provide ongoing support and professional development for coaches to ease emotional exhaustion, physical fatigue, and persistent challenges of members. • Take advantage of resources for team-building (American Psychological Association self-guided program: https://www.apa.org/education/k12/teach-teamwork.aspx?tab=5) and for deeper professional development (Social and Emotional Learning Coaching Toolkit; Yoder & Gurke, 2017).
Secure more intensive SEL services and maintain professional standards	The American Psychological Association’s (2017) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct and the Council for Exceptional Children’s Advanced Special Education Preparation Standards offer professional standards to avoid derailment of group work.	• Adhere to professional standards. • Recognize that sensitive issues will arise, with potential psychological, emotional, or social discomfort. For example, students may disclose that they are being abused or bullied. • Do not try to handle sensitive SEL issues alone. • Make sure all group members and coaches know how to report disclosures; what additional services are needed; and how more-intensive SEL, behavioral, and psychological services should be provided and by whom. • Be ready to call on expert professionals (e.g., school psychologists, counselors, mental health professionals) to lend support, guidance, and services. • Know how to secure consent, and maintain privacy and confidentiality to minimize further harm—and to maximize a therapeutic response.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-bbx-10.1177_10742956221143497 – Supplemental material for Working Together: Leveraging Teacher Study Groups to Improve Social and Emotional Learning in the Classroom

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-bbx-10.1177_10742956221143497 for Working Together: Leveraging Teacher Study Groups to Improve Social and Emotional Learning in the Classroom by Gregory J. Benner, Marcia L. Rock, Lisa A. Strycker, Erica O. Lee, Pamela Bailey and Ashley S. Virgin in Beyond Behavior

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This manuscript was supported, in part, by the U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences, grant R324A180220, awarded to The University of Alabama. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

ORCID iD

Erica O. Lee

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available at on the Beyond Behavior website with the online version of this article.

References

Algozzine

Barrett

Eber

George

Horner

Lewis

Putnam

Swain-Bradway

McIntosh

Sugai

(2019). School-wide PBIS tiered fidelity inventory. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. https://www.pbis.org

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.

Bailey

Stickle

Brion-Meisels

Jones

S. M.

(2019). Re-imagining social-emotional learning: Findings from a strategy-based approach. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(5), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721719827549

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

Benner

G. J.

Filderman

M. J.

Barnard-Brak

Pennefather

Smith

J. L. M.

Strycker

L. A.

(2022). Evidence of efficacy of the Integrated Literacy Study Group professional learning program to enhance reading instruction for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 60(1), 182–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22773

Benner

G. J.

Kutash

Nelson

J. R.

Fisher

M. B.

(2013). Closing the achievement gap of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders through multi-tiered systems of support. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0018

Benner

G. J.

Nelson

J. R.

Sanders

E. A.

Ralston

N. C.

(2012). Behavior intervention for students with externalizing behavior problems: Primary-level standard protocol. Exceptional Children, 78(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291207800203

Benner

G. J.

Strycker

L. A.

Pennefather

Smith

J. L. M.

(2022). Improving literacy for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: An innovative approach. Teacher Education and Special Education, 45(4), 331–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064221079813

Blitz

C. L.

(2013). Can online learning communities achieve the goals of traditional professional learning communities? What the literature says (REL 2013–003). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

10.

Brunsting

N. C.

Bettini

Rock

M. L.

Royer

D. J.

Common

E. A.

Lane

K. L.

Xie

Chen

Zeng

(2022). Burnout of special educators serving students with emotional-behavioral disorders: A longitudinal study. Remedial and Special Education, 43(3), 160–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325211030562

11.

Brunsting

N. C.

Sreckovic

M. A.

Lane

K. L.

(2014). Special education teacher burnout: A synthesis of research from 1979 to 2013. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(4), 681–711. https://doi.org/1010.1353/etc.2014.0032

12.

Bullough

R. V.

Smith

L. K.

(2016). Being a student of teaching: Practitioner research and study groups. In Loughran

Hamilton

L. M.

(Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 305–351). Springer.

13.

Clair

(1998). Teacher study groups: Persistent questions in a promising approach. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 465–492. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588118

14.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (2022). What is social and emotional learning? https://schoolguide.casel.org/what-is-sel/what-is-sel/

15.

Cunningham

A. E.

Etter

Platas

Wheeler

Campbell

(2015). Professional development in emergent literacy: A design experiment of teacher study groups. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 31, 62–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2014.12.002

16.

Darling-Hammond

Hyler

M. E.

Gardner

(2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.

17.

DeMonte

(2013). High quality professional development for teachers: Supporting teacher training to improve student learning. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/DeMonteLearning4Teachers-1.pdf

18.

Desimone

L. M.

Garet

M. S.

(2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society, and Education, 7(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.25115/PSYE.V7I3.515

19.

Didion

Toste

J. R.

Filderman

M. J.

(2020). Teacher professional development and student reading achievement: A meta-analytic review of the effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13, 29–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2019.1670884

20.

DiPerna

J. C.

Elliott

S. N.

(2002). Promoting academic enablers to improve student achievement: An introduction to the mini-series. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2002.12086156

21.

Durlak

J. A.

Weissberg

R. P.

Dymnicki

A. B.

Taylor

R. D.

Schellinger

K. B.

(2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

22.

Early

D. M.

Maxwell

K. L.

Ponder

B. D.

Pan

(2017). Improving teacher-child interactions: A randomized controlled trial of Making the Most of Classroom Interactions and My Teaching Partner professional development models. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 38, 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.08.005

23.

Epstein

Atkins

Cullinan

Kutash

Weaver

(2008). Reducing behavior problems in the elementary school classroom: A practice guide (NCEE #2008-012). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/docs/practiceguide/behavior_pg_092308.pdf

24.

Firestone

A. R.

Cruz

R. A.

Rodl

J. E.

(2020). Teacher study groups: An integrative literature synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 90(5), 675–709. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320938128

25.

Galea

Merchant

R. M.

Lurie

(2020). The mental health consequences of COVID-19 and physical distancing: The need for prevention and early intervention. JAMA Internal Medicine, 180(6), 817–818. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.1562

26.

Garrett

Legon

Fredericksen

E. E.

(2019). CHLOE 3 behind the numbers: The changing landscape of online education. Quality Matters. http://qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/resource-center/articles-resources/CHLOE-3-report2019

27.

Gersten

Dimino

Jayanthi

Kim

J. S.

Santoro

L. E.

(2010). Teacher study group: Impact of the professional development model on reading instruction and student outcomes in first grade classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 694–739. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209361208

28.

Gilmour

A. F.

Wehby

J. H.

(2020). The association between teaching students with disabilities and teacher turnover. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5), 1042–1060. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000394

29.

Greenberg

Putman

Walsh

(2014). Training our future teachers: Classroom management. Revised. National Council on Teacher Quality.

30.

Greenberg

Walsh

McKee

(2014). Appendix C: Background and methodology for alternative certification pilot [2014 Teacher Prep Review]. National Council on Teacher Quality.

31.

Gresham

(2015). Evidence-based social skills interventions for students at risk for EBD. Remedial and Special Education, 36(2), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514556183

32.

Haydon

Alter

Hawkins

Kendall Theado

(2019). “Check Yourself”: Mindfulness-based stress reduction for teachers of students with challenging behaviors. Beyond Behavior, 28(1), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295619831620

33.

Hersh

Walker

H. M.

(1983). Great expectations: Making schools effective for all students. Policy Studies Review, 2, 147–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200202

34.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).

35.

Jayanthi

Gersten

Spallone

Dimino

Schumacher

Smolkowski

Karp

Haymond

(2018). Impact of a tier 2 fractions intervention on 5th grade students’ fractions achievement: A technical report. Instructional Research Group.

36.

Jennings

P. A.

Frank

J. L.

(2015). Inservice preparation for educators. In Durlak

J. A.

Domitrovich

C. E.

Weissberg

R. P.

Gullotta

T. P.

(Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 422–437). The Guilford Press.

37.

Jones

S. M.

Bailey

Brush

Kahn

(2018). Preparing for effective SEL implementation. Harvard Graduate School of Education Easel Lab. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Preparing-for-Effective-SEL-Implementation.pdf

38.

Jones

S. M.

Bouffard

S. M.

(2012). Social and emotional learning in schools: From programs to strategies. Society for Research in Child Development.

39.

Jones

S. M.

Brush

K. E.

Ramirez

Mao

Z. X.

Marenus

Wettje

Finney

Raisch

Podoloff

Kahn

Barnes

Stickle

Brion-Meisels

McIntyre

Cuartas

Bailey

(2021). Navigating SEL from the inside out: Looking inside & across 33 leading SEL programs: A practical resource for schools and OST providers: Revised & expanded second edition. The Wallace Foundation.

40.

Joyce

Showers

(2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Association for Supervision & Curriculum Deve.

41.

Kennedy

M. M.

(2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800

42.

Kocaoz

O. E.

Little

M. E.

Gallup

(2019). Impact of video modeling combined with Skillstreaming teaching procedures on the social interaction skills of middle school-aged children with ASD. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 54(3), 237–248. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/26780624

43.

Kolbe-Holden

(2017). An evaluation of social skill intervention effects using the Skillstreaming curriculum [Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Maine].

44.

Kraft

M. A.

Blazar

Hogan

(2018). The effect of teacher coaching on instruction and achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 547–588. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318759268

45.

Kramer

T. J.

Caldarella

Young

K. R.

Fischer

Warren

J. S.

(2014). Implementing “Strong Kids” school-wide to reduce internalizing behaviors and increase prosocial behaviors. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(4), 659–680. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2014.0031

46.

Lay

C. D.

Allman

Cutri

R. M.

Kimmons

(2020). Examining a decade of research in online teacher professional development. Frontiers in Education, 5, Article 573129. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.573129

47.

Leeb

R. T.

Bitsko

R. H.

Radhakrishnan

Martinez

Njai

Holland

K. M.

(2020). Mental health–related emergency department visits among children aged <18 years during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, January 1–October 17. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69, 1675–1680. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a3external icon

48.

Lipton

Nowicki

(2009). The social emotional learning framework (SELF): A guide for understanding brain-based social-emotional learning impairments. The Journal of Developmental Processes, 4, 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3394-0_4

49.

Marquez

Vincent

C. G.

Pennefather

Sprague

J. R.

Smolkowski

Yeaton

(2014). The iterative development and initial evaluation of We Have Skills!, an innovative approach to teaching social skills to elementary students. Education and Treatment of Children, 37(1), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2014.0000

50.

McGinnis

Goldstein

A. F.

(2003). Skillstreaming in early childhood: New strategies and perspectives fort teaching prosocial skills (rev. ed.). Research Press.

51.

McKown

(2019). Challenges and opportunities in the applied assessment of student social and emotional learning. Educational Psychologist, 54(3), 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1614446

52.

McKown

Russo-Ponsaran

N. M.

Allen

Johnson

J. K.

Warren-Khot

H. K.

(2016). Social-emotional factors and academic outcomes among elementary-aged children. Infant and Child Development, 25(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.1926

53.

McKown

Russo-Ponsaran

N. M.

Johnson

J. K.

Russo

Allen

(2016). Web-based assessment of children’s social-emotional comprehension. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 34(4), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915604564

54.

Melnick

Martinez

(2019). Preparing teachers to support social and emotional learning: A case study of San Jose State University and Lakewood Elementary School. Learning Policy Institute.

55.

Meyers

R. K.

Devlin-Scherer

W. L.

Devlin-Scherer

Wright

Roger

A. M.

(1997). The effects of collaborative teacher study groups and principal coaching on individual teacher change. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 32(1), 18–21. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/23870792

56.

Mondi

C. F.

Giovanelli

Reynolds

A. J.

(2021). Fostering socio-emotional learning through early childhood intervention. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 15, Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-021-00084-8

57.

Murano

Way

J. D.

Martin

J. E.

Walton

K. E.

Anguiano-Carrasco

Burrus

(2019). The need for high-quality pre-service and inservice teacher training in social and emotional learning. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 12(2), 111–113. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-02-2019-0028

58.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine; Committee on Adolescent Health Care Services and Models of Care for Treatment, Prevention, and Healthy Development. (2009). Adolescent health services: Missing opportunities (R. S. Lawrence, J. Appleton Gootman, & L. J. Sim, Eds.). National Academies Press.

59.

Nelson

J. R.

Benner

G. J.

Mooney

(2008). Instructional practices for students with behavioral disorders: Strategies for reading, writing, and math. The Guilford Press.

60.

Ostovar-Nameghi

S. A.

Sheikhahmadi

(2016). From teacher isolation to teacher collaboration: Theoretical perspectives and empirical findings. English Language Teaching, 9(5), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n5p197

61.

Papay

J. P.

Taylor

E. S.

Tyler

J. H.

Laski

M. E.

(2016). Learning job skills from colleagues at work: Evidence from a field experiment using teacher performance data (National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 21986).

62.

Pennefather

J. T.

Smolkowski

(2015). Validation of the Elementary Social Behavior Assessment: A measure of student prosocial school behaviors. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 40(3), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508414557562

63.

Reiser

B. J.

Michaels

Moon

Bell

Dyer

Edwards

K. D.

McGill

T. A. W.

Novak

Park

(2017). Scaling up three-dimensional science learning through teacher-led study groups across a state. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3), 280–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117699598

64.

Rock

M. L.

(2019a). An ASCD study guide for the eCoaching continuum: Using technology to enrich professional development and improve student outcomes. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

65.

Rock

M. L.

(2019b). The eCoaching continuum: Using technology to enrich professional development and improve student outcomes. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

66.

Rock

M. L.

Schoenfeld

Zigmond

Gable

R. A.

Ploessl

D. M.

Salter

(2013). Can you Skype me now? Developing teachers’ classroom management practices through virtual coaching. Beyond Behavior, 22(3), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/107429561302200303

67.

Rock

M. L.

Schumacker

Gregg

Gable

R. A.

Zigmond

N. P.

Howard

(2014). How are they now? Longer term effects of eCoaching through online bug-in-ear technology. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(2), 159–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406414525048

68.

Romer

von der Embse

Eklund

Kilgus

Perales

Splett

J. W.

Sudlo

Wheeler

(2020). Best practices in social, emotional, and behavioral screening: An implementation guide. https://smhcollaborative.org/universalscreening

69.

Schonert-Reichl

K. A.

Kitil

M. J.

Hanson-Peterson

(2017). To reach the students, teach the teachers: A national scan of teacher preparation and social and emotional learning [Report]. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. University of British Columbia.

70.

Sheridan

S. M.

Knoche

L. L.

Kupzyk

K. A.

Edwards

C. P.

Marvin

C. A.

(2011). A randomized trial examining the effects of parent engagement on early language and literacy: The Getting Ready intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 49(3), 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.03.001

71.

State

T. M.

Simonsen

Hirn

R. G.

Wills

(2019). Bridging the research-to-practice gap through effective professional development for teachers working with students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 44, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742918816447

72.

Suh

(2020). Teachers’ collective construction of students: An investigation of student positionings reinforced in a teacher study group. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(3), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1702625

73.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2022). 43rd annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2021.

74.

Vangrieken

Meredith

Packer

Kyndt

(2017). Teacher communities as a context for professional development: A systematic review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.001

75.

Walker

H. M.

Marquez

Yeaton

Pennefather

Forness

S. R.

Vincent

C. G.

(2015). Teacher judgment in assessing students’ social behavior within a response-to-intervention framework: Using what teachers know. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(3), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2015.0019

76.

Walker

H. M.

Rankin

(1983). Assessing the behavioral expectations and demands of less restrictive settings. School Psychology Review, 12(3), 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.1983.12085043

77.

Wheelock College of Education and Human Development. (2021). Students with learning and attention issues during COVID-19: Insights from general educators. National Center for Learning Disabilities and Understood. https://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FINAL-NCLD-Policy-Brief-July-2021.pdf

78.

xSEL Labs. (2020). Access key social-emotional skills in kindergarten through grade 12. https://xsel-labs.com/assessments/selweb/

79.

Yao

Rao

Jiang

Xiong

(2020). What role should teachers play in online teaching during COVID-19 pandemic? Evidence from China. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 5(2), 517–524. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.20.ar035

80.

Yoder

Gurke

(2017). Social and emotional learning coaching toolkit: Keeping SEL at the center. American Institutes for Research.

81.

Yoon

S. A.

Miller

Richman

Wendel

D. J.

Schoenfeld

Anderson

Shim

(2020). Encouraging collaboration and building community in online asynchronous professional development: Designing for social capital. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15(3), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09326-2

82.

Zee

Koomen

H. M. Y.

(2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effects on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801

83.

Zigler

Taussig

Black

(1992). Early childhood intervention: A promising preventative for juvenile delinquency. American Psychologist, 47(8), 997–1006. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.8.997

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.25 MB