Achievement First schools believe that every child has the ability to be successful, no matter their race or economic status, as long as children have access to a great education—one that provides the academic and character skills they need to graduate from prestigious colleges. It is also our fundamental belief that the more time scholars (our students) spend in class, engaging in rigorous material and collaborative discussion, the more they will learn and grow both academically and socially. Throughout the past year, 25% our scholars have missed out on vital instructional time due to egregious behavior which required classroom removals. The purpose of this Curriculum Research Project is to develop a school wide behavior curriculum with normed structures that will support our most struggling scholars, therefore, reducing the number of lost instructional minutes.
School Context
Achievement First Iluminar Mayoral Academy is located in Providence, Rhode Island and is in its first year of operation. It is currently a scaled school, with 174 kindergarten and first grade students. As a mayoral academy, Achievement First has agreements to accept and educate students from the cities of Providence (87%), North Providence (4%), Cranston (7%), and Warwick (2%). The school educates a diverse population of children including students who are Hispanic (69%), Black (25%), White (5%), and Asian (1%) (see Figure 1). 88% of the students at Iluminar receive free or reduced lunch. 53% of students are female and 47% are male.
Achievement First Iluminar Mayoral Academy is located in Providence, Rhode Island and is in its first year of operation. It is currently a scaled school, with 174 kindergarten and first grade students. As a mayoral academy, Achievement First has agreements to accept and educate students from the cities of Providence (87%), North Providence (4%), Cranston (7%), and Warwick (2%). The school educates a diverse population of children including students who are Hispanic (69%), Black (25%), White (5%), and Asian (1%) (see Figure 1). 88% of the students at Iluminar receive free or reduced lunch. 53% of students are female and 47% are male.
Needs Assessment
Throughout the past year, we saw a large number of scholars being removed from classrooms due to egregious behaviors such as extreme tantrums, defiance, and aggression. These scholar removals amounted to about 5,400 minutes of lost instructional time this year alone (an average of 675 minutes per month). By March, the Culture Team (comprised of the Dean of School Culture [me] and two behavior specialists who respond to classroom referrals when scholars struggle with behavior) began to review our routines and procedures so that all removals were predictable for scholars who required multiple referrals throughout the day. These changes included explicit teacher coaching that focused on keeping the behavior bar high for all scholars by strictly adhering to our logical consequences chain (L1-Name Drop/ Non-verbal correction, L2- Take Two (two minute time out), L3- Time Away (longer time out with reflection work), L4- Push-In (Leadership or Culture Team come into the classroom to support scholar), L5- Removal (disruptive or unsafe behaviors or three Time Aways in an AM or PM period).
With these changes, we saw a significant reduction in removals that occurred throughout the week as we reduced lost instructional time by one-third (an average of 200 lost instructional minutes for the months of March, April, and May combined). Reflecting on our current data found in Figure 2, 50% of all removals that have occurred after March 1st stem from children having negative reactions when they are prompted to take a Time Away (coded as REF: Refusal to Follow Directions)
Throughout the past year, we saw a large number of scholars being removed from classrooms due to egregious behaviors such as extreme tantrums, defiance, and aggression. These scholar removals amounted to about 5,400 minutes of lost instructional time this year alone (an average of 675 minutes per month). By March, the Culture Team (comprised of the Dean of School Culture [me] and two behavior specialists who respond to classroom referrals when scholars struggle with behavior) began to review our routines and procedures so that all removals were predictable for scholars who required multiple referrals throughout the day. These changes included explicit teacher coaching that focused on keeping the behavior bar high for all scholars by strictly adhering to our logical consequences chain (L1-Name Drop/ Non-verbal correction, L2- Take Two (two minute time out), L3- Time Away (longer time out with reflection work), L4- Push-In (Leadership or Culture Team come into the classroom to support scholar), L5- Removal (disruptive or unsafe behaviors or three Time Aways in an AM or PM period).
With these changes, we saw a significant reduction in removals that occurred throughout the week as we reduced lost instructional time by one-third (an average of 200 lost instructional minutes for the months of March, April, and May combined). Reflecting on our current data found in Figure 2, 50% of all removals that have occurred after March 1st stem from children having negative reactions when they are prompted to take a Time Away (coded as REF: Refusal to Follow Directions)
In order to further assess the Time Away data, the classroom teachers were given a survey to assess the consistency of their Time Away structures and the corresponding student responses by asking the following questions: Do you use the Logical Consequences consequence chain the same way, every time, with every child. If yes, explain the process. If no, why does it vary? Do your scholars Take Time Away the first time, every time. If yes, what has made Time Away in your classroom so successful? If no, what do you think is the hold back? How can we make Time Away better?
Findings
Figure 3 shows that two out of the nine teachers surveyed use the Logical Consequences consequence chain with fidelity prior to giving a Time Away. Throughout the survey, teachers commented that they often are “unclear of how to respond in certain situations,” while others reported that they often gave children “extra chances” because they wanted to avoid “getting them upset by sending them to Time Away.” Others felt they hadn’t received enough training in Time Away structures and craved more time for “practice and explicit feedback” in order to make Time Away procedures more consistent.
Findings
Figure 3 shows that two out of the nine teachers surveyed use the Logical Consequences consequence chain with fidelity prior to giving a Time Away. Throughout the survey, teachers commented that they often are “unclear of how to respond in certain situations,” while others reported that they often gave children “extra chances” because they wanted to avoid “getting them upset by sending them to Time Away.” Others felt they hadn’t received enough training in Time Away structures and craved more time for “practice and explicit feedback” in order to make Time Away procedures more consistent.
Figure 4 reveals that according to teachers, only 30.8% of scholars take a Time Away the first time, every time. Within this portion of the survey, a majority of teachers noted that there is a lack of consistency in their Time Away procedures. “I feel like I am talking to the same kiddos over and over and I feel it is because I am not consistent.” Another teacher commented that many of their scholars have “lagging skills in terms of controlling/ responding to negative emotions. I also think my personal inconsistencies have led to this.” One teacher commented that Time Aways often do not work in their classroom since there is a “certain stigma associated with [Time Away]” and that it “could be due to the way we present(ed) this part of Logical Consequences” in our school. Another teacher commented that we need to build a stronger home/ school connection when it came to the use of Time Away as many children “do not see it as a time to reflect and fix their mistake, they see it more as the beginning to more upsets further on (calling parents, getting in trouble at home, etc.)” and that we “need to present it as more of a reflective moment to fix your mistakes and call home with positive news saying ‘this scholar made a mistake but was able to reflect.’”
While a majority of teachers reported that many scholars struggle taking Time Aways, the teachers whose scholars react well to Time Aways all noted their fidelity in using the Logical Consequence chain. One teacher noted that “Time Away is successful when [it is] coupled with consistent [and] predictable consequences.” Another teacher wrote that the reason why Time Away is so successful in their classroom “is the routine - scholars know exactly what they need to do in order to rejoin their team.”
Suggestions for Improvement
Based on the data, it is evident that our scholars were never taught or explicitly practiced the correct way to take a Time Away nor has a normed process ever been adopted school wide. Brock and Curby (2014) argue that this can have larger impactions in the classroom, as problem behaviors are often associated with inconsistent consequences and lack of adult follow through. Furthermore, many scholars are experiencing anxiety or learned helplessness, which Inoue (2012) explains as “the state of totally throwing away the effort to succeed”
(p. 119) as children are being punished at home for a reflective moment that is meant to fix behavior.
This Curriculum Research Project will focus on creating a Time Away curriculum that will be used throughout the first three weeks of school to explicitly model and practice effective Time Aways. This will include a normed Time Away and Reflection Work vision and criteria for success that will be used by all classrooms. Furthermore, I would like to create a home-school connection so that scholars can discuss the importance of Time Away with their families using growth mindset language versus a system of punishment when Time Aways occur. My research question and sub-questions are as follows:
Research Question:
Will explicit teacher modeling and student practice of Time Aways and exemplar Reflection Work during the first three weeks of school cause a decline in the number of daily classroom removals?
Sub-Questions:
Suggestions for Improvement
Based on the data, it is evident that our scholars were never taught or explicitly practiced the correct way to take a Time Away nor has a normed process ever been adopted school wide. Brock and Curby (2014) argue that this can have larger impactions in the classroom, as problem behaviors are often associated with inconsistent consequences and lack of adult follow through. Furthermore, many scholars are experiencing anxiety or learned helplessness, which Inoue (2012) explains as “the state of totally throwing away the effort to succeed”
(p. 119) as children are being punished at home for a reflective moment that is meant to fix behavior.
This Curriculum Research Project will focus on creating a Time Away curriculum that will be used throughout the first three weeks of school to explicitly model and practice effective Time Aways. This will include a normed Time Away and Reflection Work vision and criteria for success that will be used by all classrooms. Furthermore, I would like to create a home-school connection so that scholars can discuss the importance of Time Away with their families using growth mindset language versus a system of punishment when Time Aways occur. My research question and sub-questions are as follows:
Research Question:
Will explicit teacher modeling and student practice of Time Aways and exemplar Reflection Work during the first three weeks of school cause a decline in the number of daily classroom removals?
Sub-Questions:
- What effects do inconsistent classroom routines have on negative responses to Time Away?
- What effects will consistency and predictability in Time Away routines have on the number of positive reactions seen when children are asked to take a Time Away?
- What effects will positive, growth mindset based student-family conversations on the importance of Time Away have on the reduction of negative responses to Time Away?