1. "PCIT-techniques” for preschool teachers "PCIT-techniques” for preschool teachers Preventing disruptive behavior in young children: an intervention program in kindergartens Cand.psychol. Inger Marie Kvarum Hospital of Nordland, Norway Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Anne Kristine Wormdal & Turid-Suzanne Berg-Nielsen Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)

2.  Constitutional monarchy  Area: 385 155 km²  Population: 4.600.000  Most of the schools and kindergartens are public www.ssb.no www.norge.no

4. The local area where this study was conducted  Indre Salten, a rural area in North- Norway (north of the artic circle)  Consist of 5 kommuner (counties)  Area, in total: 7314 km²  Total population in Indre Salten: 20500 www.salten.no  4000 children  5, 25 % of the referred children to BUPIS in 2004 had behavioral problems (ODD, CD)Bup-data

6. Background  2-17 % of the population under 6 years have behavioral problems Filcheck, McNeil, Greco & Bernard, 2004  The group is increasing (Zeiner, Backe-Hansen, Eskeland, Ogden, Rypdal & Sommerschild,  High stability throughout years Campbell, 1995  Their social competencies are low Ogden, 2001, Lamer, 1997  Risk of developing more serious problems later in life (e.g. depression, ODD, CD) Ogden, 2001, Lamer, 1997

7. Continue: background  Official recommendations from 1997: Prevention and early interventions are needed, possibilities in kindergartens (Zeiner, Backe-Hansen, Eskeland, Ogden, Rypdal & Sommerschild, 1997)  PMT-O, MST and "The incredible years” by Webster-Stratton were put into use and evaluated in Norway  However, few studies have conducted and evaluated prevention programs in kindergartens (Sørlie, 2000)

8. The aim of this study  Develop, carry out and evaluate an intervention program based on PCIT in Norwegian kindergartens  Goals: - make the employees more aware of own communication- and playing skills - give the employees a tool to use if needed - evaluate the perceived usefulness of this intervention program

9. Main purposes  Is it possible to observe changes in the employees communication- and playing skills by using PCIT- techniques? -More "do skills” and less "don’t skills”  Would the employees feel that they have changed in their way of communicating and playing with all children in kindergartens?

10. Continue: main purposes  Do the employees perceive the intervention program as useful?  Is there any correlation between perceived usefulness of the program and personal variables as  education  years of experience in kindergartens  personal experience with disruptive children

11. Subjects  4 departments from two different public kindergartens in Indre Salten (The communes of Fauske and Saltdal)  12 (13) employees all females, mean age: 40.2 years, years of experience in kindergartens: 12.1 years (mean)  12 (13) children from these departments Girls: boys = 8:4, mean age: 4.8 years  Informed consent from the employees and the parents

12. Procedure  Present the project, ”ice-breaking” (Des. & Jan.2004/2005)  Pre- measurement of the subjects in play with children : videotaped (Jan.2005)  Evening training course (Febr. 2005)  Coaching (Feb. & Mars 2005)  Post-measurement: videotaped, DPICS, self- report questionnaire for evaluation (Mars-April- 05)

13. 131 The situation, an example from the video-clips

14. Results  Significant changes in most of the “do – skills” and “don’t – skills” (Table 1)  More “do-” and less “don’t skills” But:  less “information descriptions”  No significant changes in “reflective” and “critical statements” and in “indirect commands”

15. Table 1: DPICS, before and after the project Do - skills NM(before)M(after)SDTDfSignificance(2-taled) Labeled praise 121,259,004,39-6,11211,000*** Behavioral descriptions 120,589,175,50-5,40511,000*** Information descriptions 1229,5819,926,295,32711,000*** Unlabeled praise 121,003,422,35-3,55711,004** Reflective statements 128,7510,677,00-,94911,363 Don’t – skills Questions1223,586,007,627,99211,000*** Direct commands 123,580,832,264,21311,001** Indirect commands 123,422,833,15,64211,534 Critical statements 120,250,250,73,000111,00

16. Continue: results  The participants reported that they had changed their “do- skills” and “don’t – skills” (Table 3) :  “descriptions”  “avoiding questions”  “praising appropriate behavior”,  “reflections”  They evaluated selective ignoring as important

17. Continue: Results  The intervention program was evaluated highly positive by the participants (Table 2)

18. Table 2: The perceived usefulness of the project Benefit of participating N M (SD) My personal benefit of the course My personal benefit of the coaching The benefit for the kindergarten The benefit for kindergartens in general 11111111 6,10 (0,70) 6,40 (0,67) 5,82 (0,87) 6,20 (0,60)

19. Continue: Results  No connection between the participant’s evaluation of the program and their educational background, years of experience or personal experience with disruptive children

20. Table 3: Perceived changes Perceived personal changes N M (SD) Behavioral descriptions Avoid question Praise appropriate behavior Reflective statements Ignore inappropriate behavior Avoid commands Imitating Participating in playing 1011111111111111 5,70 (0,68) 5,36 (0,67) 5,27 (0,91) 5,27 (1,11) 4,55 (0,69) 4,18 (1,33) 3,82 (1,25) 3,45 (1,57)

21. Discussion  The actual changes in the participants “do- and don’t – skills” were a result of the chosen focus in my coaching  Positively evaluation of the project, does it:  reflects a need for this kind of knowledge  a result of the selection of participants (highly motivated)  Small group of participants (N= 12 (13) )  Practical issues

22. Future directions  How has this intervention affected the children who participated?  Changes in behavior?  Generalized at home?  Longitudinal effect  The effectiveness of this kind of intervention compared to others

23. References  Campbell, S.B. (1995): Behaviour Problems in Preschool Children: A Review of Recent Research, in Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 36 (1), s. 113-149  Filcheck, H.A., McNeil, C.B., Greco, L.A. & Bernard, R.S. (2004): Using a whole-class token economy and coaching of teacher skills in a preschool classroom to manage disruptive behaviour, Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 41 (3), s.351-361.  Lamer, K. (1997), Du og jeg og vi to! Om å fremme sosial kompetanse, teoriboka. Oslo, Universitetsforlaget AS  Ogden, T. (2001): Sosial kompetanse og problematferd I skolen; kompetanseutviklende og problemløsende arbeid i skolen, Oslo; Gyldendal Akademisk.

24. Continue: references  Sørlie, M. (2000): Sentrale kunnskapskilder og klassifikasjon av tiltak, In Sørlie, M. Alvorlige atferdsproblemer og lovende tiltak i skolen, Oslo: Praxis forlag, s. 27-34.  Zeiner, P., Backe-Hansen, E., Eskeland, S., Ogden, T., Rypdal, P. & Sommerschild, E.H., Norges Forskningsråd (2004/1997): Barn og unge med alvorlige atferdsvansker: Hva kan nyere viten fortelle oss? Hva slags hjelp trenger de? ; Ekspertuttalelse etter konferansen 18.- 19.september 1997 om tilbud til barn og unge som er spesielt vanskelige eller utagerende, Oslo: Norges Forskningsråd.