Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Collingwood
College BSEM
Pilot
A Report for the City of Yarra March 2018
Dr Malcolm J Turnbull Youth Research Centre Melbourne Graduate School of Education University of Melbourne
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
The Berry Street Education Model (BSEM) is an
educational initiative that (a) provides schools
with training, curriculum and strategies to
engage ALL students (including their most
challenging students), and (b) is designed to
improve a school’s capacity to engage vulnerable
or disadvantaged young people and help them
achieve their personal and social potential
through educational achievement. It is currently
being implemented at Collingwood College, a P-
12 facility in inner Melbourne, as part of the
Yarra Communities that Care (CTC) initiative.
Based on the results of a comprehensive Youth
Survey conducted across the LGA in 2015, CTC
has identified strengthening the well-being of
Middle Years children (8-14 year olds) as a
priority issue. The Collingwood College BSEM
Pilot is one of two CTC strategies aimed at
increasing young people’s adaptive behaviour,
capacity for coping and personal resilience. (The
other CTC well-being strategy is support for the
PATHS program in schools).
The current evaluation report, which has been
commissioned and funded by the City of Yarra as
part of Yarra CTC, examines the roll-out and
initial 12 month delivery of the BSEM at
Collingwood College with particular reference to
its impacts on teaching and learning in the
school’s Middle Years classes (i.e. Years 4 to 8). It
is anticipated that report findings will inform
ongoing delivery of the BSEM at Collingwood
College (including monitoring of the students as
they progress through year levels) and possible
expansion of the program to other Yarra schools,
under the Yarra CTC umbrella.
Evaluation Context: Yarra CTC
BSEM at Collingwood College has been
implemented as part of Yarra CTC, an initiative
seeking to promote the healthy development of
children and young people through identification
and prevention of social and health problems.
Devised and developed at the University of
Washington in the 1980s, the CTC model has
since been implemented across more than 500
communities in the United States and adopted
and adapted in the UK, Canada, the Netherlands,
Germany, and (post-2000) in Australia. The
licensed provider of the process in Australia is
CTC Ltd, a joint initiative of the Royal Children’s
Hospital (Melbourne) and Melbourne Rotary
which assists community coalitions to implement
evidence-based prevention strategies according
to Collective Impact principles. In 2017 10
registered CTC sites were located within
Victorian LGAs. Yarra CTC was launched in
February 2015.
The City of Yarra is a socio-economically and
culturally diverse LGA; 38% of the population
were born outside Australia. Inner-city
gentrification and demographic shifts have
created a residential mix of affluence and
disadvantage: i.e. growing numbers of young
professional families alongside a significant
migrant “footprint” and the largest public
housing population in Victoria. Yarra CTC
involves over 24 partner agencies working
together towards a shared vision for middle
years children and young people (aged 8-14
years) in the City of Yarra: “To enhance the
healthy development of children, young people,
and their families in Yarra through evidence
based collaborative planning, action and
evaluation.”
Informed by Yarra CTC survey findings, CTC
partners have a developed a shared Action Plan
and a commitment to three outcome areas:
1. Reduce alcohol and other drug use
2. Improve personal resilience
3. Strengthen family relationships and
management.
Six strategies or programs have been selected to
address the three outcome areas. The Two
programs being implemented in response to the
aim of improving personal resilience are
Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies
(PATHS) and the BSEM. The first school to
implement BSEM as part of Yarra CTC is
Collingwood College, which has also been
implementing elements of the PATHS syllabus for
approximately three years within its Primary
School. According to teachers and school
ii
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
leadership, the BSEM is both a complement to
PATHS, and an extension of it. Acknowledging
that a proliferation of Well-being or Social
Emotional Learning programs in recent years has
provided them with multiple choices in this area,
they cite the whole-school focus of the BSEM and
the rigour of its PD components as fundamental
to the decision to trial it.
Methodology & Research Design
Evaluation of the 2017 Collingwood College
delivery of the BSEM has drawn on a mix of
qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques
in addressing four key research questions:
1. Has the BSEM been implemented with
high fidelity (as intended) at Collingwood College?
2. Has BSEM impacted on teacher practice?
3. Has BSEM impacted on student’s wellbeing, engagement and achievement?
4. Has BSEM impacted on school-wide
practice?
Table: Summary of data collection Data source Method No.
School leadership (Primary and
Secondary Principals)
Interview 2
Teachers (2 Primary, 2
Secondary)
Interview 4
Teachers participating in
training
Survey 60
Students (Years 6 & 8) Focus
group
7
School Welfare Officer Interview 1
Yarra CTC Program Leader Interview 2
Berry Street trainers Interview 3
TOTAL 79
Theoretical Context: The BSEM
The BSEM builds on, and extends, the two-tier
‘healing’ approach characteristic of traditional
or standard models of trauma-informed learning.
The Model proposes three tiers of therapeutic
learning and growth, that extend the focus of
previous practice on repairing the student’s
regulatory abilities (Domain 1) and repairing
the student’s disrupted attachments (Domain
2), by adding a third domain: increasing the
young person’s psychological resources in
order to promote post-traumatic growth
(Domain 3). Both the professional development
(PD) training and classroom application of the
BSEM are developmental or sequential. Teachers
and students work progressively through FIVE
(sub) domains or Pedagogical lenses, starting
with ‘BODY’/ aka Increasing regulatory abilities,
and then progressing through the sub-domains of
STAMINA, ENGAGEMENT and CHARACTER. All
are anchored by the ‘lens’ of RELATIONSHIPS. In
turn, each of the sub-domains/lenses comprises
a cluster of focus areas/ sub-themes within
which are located sets of teaching and
intervention strategies, detailed lesson plans and
‘Brainbreaks’ (i.e. short-burst of 2-5 minute
physical activities) that can be woven into class
procedure, called upon when needed, or used to
respond to an individual student’s emotional
state at any time.
The BSEM Training Program
Berry Street promotes and disseminates its
Model of Education through the combination of a
comprehensive body of teaching resources and
curriculum materials that are underpinned by
intensive teacher-training and in-service activity.
The PD program aims:
(a) to educate participants in re-engaging young
people in learning, and progressing them, through sustained cognitive and behavioural change;
(b) to develop the capacity of each participant to
take strategies back to their schools/classes and lead changes to school culture and teacher practice;
(c) to assist teachers in achieving a range of
short and long-term educational outcomes that include improved academic growth, school attendance and well-being and a
iii
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
decrease in anti-social or challenging behaviours.
In the case of Collingwood College, the training
sequence has comprised four days of PD
delivered at the school (in December 2016, June
and September 2017, and February 2018) plus
the equivalent of two days consultancy, aimed at
supporting staff and students to practice and
embed BSEM principles.
The BSEM at Collingwood College
Collingwood College is one of the oldest State
schools in metropolitan Melbourne, originating
as Vere Street National School in 1882. It became
Collingwood [P-12] College in 1990. The
diversity of the district is replicated in both the
current enrolment mix and in the program
alternatives on offer. Asked to estimate socio-
economic ratios within the school population, the
Primary Principal described 55% of the current
Prep year as meeting low SES and disadvantage
criteria; 50% are ESL students. Elsewhere, the
Index of Community Socio-Educational
Advantage (ICSEA) on the MySchool website
ranks Collingwood College at 1065 for 2017
(average is 1000), with 18% of families within
the bottom quarter. The Language background
other than English is rated at 38%.
In addition to its standard mainstream Primary
and Secondary streams, the College’s specialist
curriculum options include its Steiner program,
one of the few deliveries of that pedagogical
approach on offer in a State school setting. Since
2008, Collingwood College has also offered
students the Primary school (Prep – Grade 4)
option of the Reggio Emilia program. Secondary
options include VCAL and VET while a shared
class arrangement with Fitzroy SC maximises
VCE subject choices for Year 11 & 12 students.
Challenges faced by the school Recent years have seen a major turnaround in
enrolments following a challenging period of
declining numbers. The 2017 enrolment of 855
(an increase of more than 100% since 2012) can
be said to reflect the school’s increasing success
at student engagement on the one hand, and on
the other, both population growth within the LGA
and growing levels of parental satisfaction with
diverse College curricula.
These changes notwithstanding, there is
acknowledgement that the day-to-day demands
and pressures shared by most urban educational
settings in the early 21st century continue to be
compounded at Collingwood College by its
particular demographic. School leadership cite
the particular challenges of significant levels of
socio-economic disadvantage amongst some
groups within the student population; under-
resourcing by the Department of Education,
resulting in an inadequate level of specialist
support; a public profile that has been somewhat
“skewed” or “camouflaged” by (a) its willingness
to explore alternative approaches (like Steiner
and Reggio Emilia) and (b) gentrification of some
parts of the LGA.
Why the BSEM?
Awareness of the need to focus explicitly on
domains of student well-being and self-esteem,
and on development of effective classroom
behaviour and learning strategies, prompted the
school to introduce the PATHS program, at Prep-
Year 6, in 2014. While conceding the value of
PATHS, as both “a good resource” and “a great
program”, staff have reported that its impact to
date has been “limited”. Having identified a
continuing need to address Student resilience
(i.e. in responding to the CTC survey), it was
suggested that another approach might more
effectively address the issue. Fundamental to
whole-school roll-out of the BSEM, has been
recognition of (a) the need for deeper teacher
insight/understanding of the reality of many
students’ lives; (b) the need for an enlightened
consistency across the school in the way students
are engaged and monitored, and (c) agreement
that whole-school approaches to support student
wellbeing are more effective than single program
delivery options, ensuring strategies are
embedded across the school for greater impact.
iv
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Findings
Has the BSEM been implemented with high
fidelity?
1. The Training: preparation of the
teachers to implement the BSEM
Interview feedback confirms that the school was
able to commit sufficient time and resources to
enable BSEM to deliver their PD and follow-up
days. All teachers and support staff (around 80,
across Primary and Secondary) took part.
While the PD program has not been without
minor challenges (reference has been made in
interview to Timetabling constraints and Less
than ideal physical spaces for whole staff
training sessions), Trainer reports of the
enthusiastic and positive responses they have
encountered have been strongly reinforced by
feedback from school leadership and teachers,
i.e.: very high levels of satisfaction with the PD,
and general agreement that both style and
content have successfully engaged teachers
‘across the board’. The presentations
themselves have been described as “highly” or
“very engaging”, “excellent”, “inspiring” and
“absolutely outstanding”. In summary, the BSEM
was delivered as designed and at a high quality.
A survey of training participants, conducted on
the last day of PD, and completed by 75% of staff
(i.e. 60 out of 80 participants), strongly
reinforces the positive interview feedback.
Asked to reflect on ways in which the PD had
enriched both their learning and teaching,
respondents made persistent reference to
coming away with: a better understanding of
themselves, heightened awareness of how to
support and teach trauma-affected students,
feeling validated in their approaches and ideas
they have implemented; a common language,
etc. Asked to nominate the components of the
BSEM they had found most useful in the
classroom: 10% of respondents nominated ALL
domains and elements; a further 42%
nominated several elements within each
DOMAIN; 70% of survey respondents
nominated elements within the STAMINA
domain as most useful.
2. Program Roll-out
Interviews late in the year indicated that the
BSEM had been introduced to the students with
varying levels of rigour; however “everyone has
taken on something … there have been lots of
different starting points”. The key challenge in
rolling-out the BSEM has been incorporating
content into already very tight timetables. Lack
of time has limited opportunities for the
classroom observation component of the
training (for instance). The secondary school
Principal in 2017 took responsibility for the
BSEM in addition to his general administrative
duties, highlights the desirability (in future) of
releasing a teacher part-time to co-ordinate
delivery and monitoring of the program.
Primary teacher interviewees have reported
finding the BSEM highly compatible with both
the Steiner & Reggio Emilia philosophies. They
appear to have been at an advantage in rolling
out the BSEM (“Developing relationships is much
simpler if you have the kids the whole time”). At
the same time, it should be noted that a number
of Secondary teachers have been enterprising in
using Home group time (30 minutes each
morning) as their delivery vehicle. Enthusiastic
take-up of the BSEM by these and other Middle
Years staff has prompted the establishment of
‘Mindfulness Monday’ for the school’s Year 9
cohort. Unsurprisingly, opportunities have been
more limited for single subject teachers.
However, staff report that ‘Brainbreaks’ are
being used across the school. BSEM components
have also been part-and-parcel of a strong
emphasis on Mental Health & Well-being in the
Secondary Health & PE syllabus.
Has the BSEM impacted on Teacher Practice?
1. Impact on Professional Learning
Having praised the engagement capacity of the
BSEM training, interviewees likewise confirmed
v
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
its value as Professional Learning in the areas of
traumatology and alternative pedagogies. For
instance: interviewees described the training
and the suite of reference booklets as “a godsend
to young teachers”, in many cases unprepared by
their “patchy” undergraduate training or limited
experiences on practicum for “behaviour
management … [and] the whole pastoral care
thing”. The BSEM has also been described as
“still enriching for more experienced teachers”. A
recurrent theme at interview was the value of
the BSEM in encouraging and promoting
personal reflection. One teacher expressed
particular pleasure at the way the training and
implementation of the BSEM were validating her
practice and skill level.
2. Changes to teacher practice
Reference was made to the value of BSEM training in providing all practitioners - and not just those new to alternative pedagogies - with a “common language” and a readily accessible tool-box of practical strategies, activities and ideas. Interviewees provided several examples of
changes to their own practice that have proved
beneficial. For example: Secondary teachers
reported having immediately introduced the
BODY domain at the start of Term 1, and noted
the efficacy of compiling de-escalation charts,
instituting regular brainbreaks and facilitating
discussions around physical responses to stress
at a time when “… They’re in a new class … some
teachers are new … it’s a new year”.
Other examples were provided by teachers who
reported on the efficacy of five minute ‘Thumb
pointing’ brain-break, Growth mindset lessons
“Whenever I start something new with the
students that I know they’re going to find a
challenge”) and the process of recording reading
milestones in a reading log (“That really pushes
them forward”).
3. Changes in Student-Teacher
relationships
There was clear recognition that BSEM training
had reinforced insight into the students’ needs
and how best to solidify the teacher-student
relationship. According to one teacher: “When a
child is talking – I remind myself: it’s because he
or she needs to talk … and I need to focus on what
else might be happening”.
Others highlighted the usefulness to their day-
to-day interactions of: the BSEM concept of
Unconditional Positive Regard: and the flow-on
benefits of facilitating a calm and focused
learning environment. Several interviewees
stressed the importance of continuing to
maintain the momentum as regards the BSEM. A
large sector of the staff having been exposed to
largely “new material”, one teacher stressed the
imperative of ensuring that the PD be
reinforced through rigorous classroom
application: “When the training finishes, we can’t
just let it peter out …This is actually the bread
and butter of what we do …”.
Has the BSEM impacted on Student Engagement, Well-being and Achievement?
1. Understanding of BSEM domains and
Increased Self-awareness
Student focus groups near the end of the pilot
indicated that a number of BSEM terms, learned
at the outset of the pilot, were continuing to
resonate with both Primary and Secondary
young people. Focus group participants
specifically confirmed having “taken on”:
‘Growth Mindset’, Resilience, Mindfulness,
Present Centred Grounded and Zen Zone.
2. Impact of BSEM on Student well-
being
In terms of the BSEM assisting young people in
development of coping or adaptive behaviour,
Years 5/6 students confirmed the usefulness of:
Mood charts (in helping alert teachers when
they felt unready for learning); De-escalation
charts; SAFETY PLANS; and a variety of
Brainbreaks. Year 7/8 students echoed their
Primary counterparts in citing the practical
value of both Safety Plans (expressing
confidence that they had people they could go to
in a time of crisis or difficulty) and Brain breaks.
vi
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
They reported having tried and utilised various
breathing exercises, ‘counting our pulses’,
variations on ‘silent ball’, thumb pointing, etc.
Overall, student feedback indicates that a clear
understanding and recognition of the link
between stress and not being able to learn
effectively, underlies individualised ‘calming’
strategies. Focus group participants uniformly
cited positive relationships with their class or
home-group teachers.
3. Impact of the BSEM on student
achievement & engagement
It is generally agreed that roll-out of the BSEM
has been just one contributing factor within the
‘bigger picture’, its introduction having
coincided with – and been part of – the school’s
strategic focus on improving student
performance against statewide averages and
attendance and school completion data. Targets
set in the school’s latest Strategic plan (2015-
18) included such projections as: a 10%
increase by 2018 in the number of students
performing at A or B levels in AUSVELS; and for
Annual SASS results to demonstrate improved
student satisfaction (at or above the 75th
percentile by 2018) within such Engagement
and Well-being variables as school
connectedness, learning confidence, student
safety and classroom behaviour.
Two years into the time-frame, the school was
able to report (for instance) that AusVELS
results were within the middle 60% of Victorian
schools (and similar to like schools); and that
results for Connectedness to School and Student
Safety variables on SASS 2016 were within the
middle band (at Primary level) and within the
top 20% of schools (at Secondary level). The
following year SASS 2017 confirmed that
Strategic plan targets were being met, with
results for such variables as Effective classroom
behaviour, Resilience, Connectedness, School
safety Self-regulation and Confidence all at or
above the 75th percentile.
While more than one interviewee suggested that
these changes need to be viewed with some
caution (given the socio-economic diversity of
the student mix), improvements in annual data
would seem to reflect a school culture open to
alternative pedagogies and innovation. The
Primary Principal anticipates a further – and
marked - upward shift in Engagement & Well-
being in the next set of SASS data (2018), and he
feels confident in nominating the BSEM as one
contributing factor.
Has the BSEM impacted on school-wide practice? While the take-up of BSEM has varied from
teacher to teacher, school leadership believes
that the impact of the Model is being felt across
Collingwood College, is already “heavily
embedded” in the school’s strategic planning, and
has begun to “filter down to teacher performance
plans”. It is conceded that take-up of BSEM
elements has been strongest at Primary level.
Even so, interviewees have noted having
witnessed “a lot of work in [Secondary] home
groups” or having observed classes work on
character strengths.
Conclusion: Where to Next
The Primary School Principal suggests that the
biggest challenge ahead will be keeping up the
momentum. Given the need to support staff in
keeping abreast of current research in their
individual Berry Street ‘journeys’, the need to
facilitate formal integration of BSEM into the
whole-school syllabus, and the need to ensure
that new staff are able to ‘immerse’ themselves
in BSEM principles, it has been suggested (in
interview and survey): that Collingwood College
continue its engagement with Berry Street
through refresher sessions, individual
consultations, etc.; and that the school attempt,
where possible, to ensure that co-ordination of
BSEM activities is a formal part of an
appropriately credentialed Leading Teacher’s
workload.
Recommendations
(a) That, in order to ensure to maximise the
efficiency, consistency and rigour of
Collingwood College’s ongoing
subscription to the BSEM, that
vii
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
responsibility for co-ordination and
implementation be made a designated
part of a suitably-qualified Leading
Teacher’s role.
(b) Given strong interest (in survey
responses) in further access to trauma-
informed educational research and the
sharing of ‘coalface’ experiences and
strategies, that Collingwood College be
encouraged to become involved in Berry
Street’s Alumni program;
(c) That new staff be provided with the
opportunities to complete Berry Street
training;
(d) That the school progress its relationship
with Berry Street through
commissioning follow-up and refresher
sessions
(e) Interest having been expressed in
extending BSEM training to students (as
originally intended), that student
leaders be invited to participate in future
follow-up sessions or refresher
seminars.
(f) Given the recent timing of the Pilot that
the school continue to monitor annual
SASS data and other achievement
indicators in the interests of assessing
longer-term impact of the BSEM.
With a view to the possible expansion of CTC’s
BSEM partnerships into other schools, and based
on findings from multiple implementations of the
BSEM, it is recommended that:
• Participating schools seek to ensure
school-wide (rather than sectional or
year level) implementation of the BSEM.
• Further to the above, that in taking on
the BSEM, the school commit (a) to
ensuring ALL staff are able to undertake
the PD and training component, and (b)
that sufficient resources and time are
allocated to enable Berry Street trainers
to maximise their delivery of the PD
content.
• Where possible, the school make every
effort to ensure that a dedicated teacher,
with specifically-allocated time-release,
etc, take on responsibility for overall co-
ordination of the BSEM.
8
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
CONTENTS
Executive Summary i-vii
1. Introduction 2
2. Evaluation Context: Yarra Communities that Care 3
3. Methodology & Research design 8
4. Theoretical Context : The BSEM 9
• The BSEM Training Program 11
• The BSEM at Collingwood College 13
o Collingwood College 13
o Challenges faced by the school 14
o Why the BSEM? 15
5. FINDINGS 17
• Implementation of the Model at Collingwood
College 17
• Impact of BSEM on teacher practice 22
• Impact of BSEM on student wellbeing,
engagement and achievement 25
• Schoolwide impact of the BSEM 29
• Conclusion 30
• Recommendations 31
• Appendix 34
9
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Introduction
The Berry Street Education Model (BSEM) is an educational initiative that (a) provides
schools with training, curriculum and strategies to engage ALL students (including their
most challenging students), and (b) is designed to improve a school’s capacity to engage
vulnerable or disadvantaged young people and help them achieve their personal and
social potential through educational achievement. It is currently being implemented at
Collingwood College, a P-12 facility in inner Melbourne, as part of the Yarra Communities
that Care (CTC) initiative.
Based on the results of a comprehensive Youth survey conducted across the LGA in 2015,
CTC has identified strengthening the well-being of Middle Years children (8-14 year olds)
as a priority issue. The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot is one of two CTC strategies aimed
at increasing young people’s adaptive behaviour, capacity for coping and personal
resilience. (The other CTC well-being strategy is support for the PATHS program in
schools).
Linking the research domains of traumatology and positive education, the BSEM was
originally developed to assist teachers to address the complex needs of students who had
experienced trauma at the three school campuses set up and run by the Berry Street
organisation. 1 On the basis of successful in-house application of that training, and in
response to a number of requests for help from the broader community, the decision was
made by Berry Street management in 2014 to promote and share the BSEM with
mainstream government and independent schools.
Implicit in the decision was recognition that:
1 Brunzell, T. (2014). Trauma Informed Positive Education at the Berry Street School. Melbourne: Berry Street Victoria. Retrieved from www.berrystreet.org.au 28 April 2015; Brunzell, T., Abbott, L. & Sheehan, R. (eds) (2015) The Berry Street Education Model: Curriculum and Classroom Strategies, Melbourne: Berry Street Victoria; Brunzell, T., Waters, L., & Stokes, H. (2015). Teaching with strengths in trauma-affected students: A new approach to healing and growth in the classroom. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85, 1, 3-9. Having been a key participant in the Victorian social services network since 1877, Berry Street is the largest independent
child and welfare organisation in the state. Its programs have encompassed counselling, housing and employment assistance,
therapeutic outreach and prevention programs, residential care and (beginning in 2003) formal educational programming.
The Berry Street school was a response to concerns that the educational and therapeutic needs of a growing number of
vulnerable young Victorians were not being met by mainstream settings. 130 young people are currently enrolled across
three campuses (at Noble Park, Shepparton and Morwell).
10
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
• a significant proportion of Australian school students have been trauma-affected.
(While exact statistics are elusive, a recent estimate that almost 40% of American
school students have been exposed to trauma has clear ramifications for
Australian educators)
• schools are in real need of educational approaches and pedagogies that address a
range of symptoms and behaviours (such as school refusal, ADHD, limited
attentional capacities, poor relationships, etc).
Accordingly, the model was piloted in two mainstream schools in 2015. 2 Its success
having confirmed the potential benefits of the BSEM for ALL students (and teachers) at
those settings, an estimated 3100 teachers and other school personnel have completed
the BSEM Professional Development program and the BSEM has been adopted as a
whole-school approach to developing students’ social emotional competence by 57
additional schools.
The current evaluation report, which has been commissioned and funded by the City of
Yarra as part of Yarra CTC, examines the roll-out and initial 12 month delivery of the
BSEM at Collingwood College with particular reference to its impacts on teaching and
learning in the school’s Middle Years classes (i.e. Years 5-8). It is anticipated that report
findings will inform ongoing delivery of the BSEM at Collingwood College and possible
expansion of the program to other schools, under the Yarra CTC umbrella.
Evaluation Context: Yarra Communities that Care
Communities that Care
Communities that Care is an evidence-based framework that empowers communities to
work together and build local capacity to address the root-causes of issues facing their
young people. It advocates the implementation of strategies that are prevention focused,
evidence-based and wide reaching. It works to prevent health and social problems by
enhancing factors likely to lead to positive development, and reducing factors likely to
lead to adverse outcomes for children and young people.
The CTC framework has been shown to be successful through a number of large scale
community trials, both in the United States (where it originated), and in Australia.
Devised and developed at the University of Washington in the 1980s, the CTC model has
since been implemented across more than 500 communities in the United States and
2 See Stokes, H. & Turnbull, M. (2016) Evaluation of the Berry Street Education Model: Trauma-informed positive education enacted in mainstream schools, Melbourne: Youth Research Centre, University of Melbourne
11
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
adopted and adapted in the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, and (post-2000) in
Australia. The licensed provider of the process in Australia is CTC Ltd, a joint initiative of
the Royal Children’s Hospital (Melbourne) and Melbourne Rotary which assists
community coalitions to implement evidence-based prevention strategies according to
Collective Impact principles. In 2017 registered CTC sites are located within local
Government in the Cities of Bendigo, Cardinia, Knox, Alpine, Colac, East Gippsland,
Stonnington, Redcliffe (Qld), Warrnambool and Yarra. Yarra CTC was launched in
February 2015.
The CTC process involves five phases that form part of an on ongoing cycle of action.
These include:
1. creating community readiness
2. mobilising the support of key leaders and setting up a committee to oversee the program
3. developing a community profile through a CTC Youth Survey
4. identifying evidence-based strategies and developing an action plan
5. implementing and evaluating agreed strategies.
CTC subscribes to research evidence:
➢ That five basic factors promote positive social development (i.e. opportunities for
developmentally appropriate involvement; skills to participate and succeed;
recognition for effort, improvement and achievement; strong social bonds; and
clear, consistent standards for behaviour)
➢ That risk factors (eg. Family management problems, academic failure) can
interrupt the process of positive development, while enhancement of protective
factors can act as a buffer in otherwise adverse circumstances
Yarra Communities that Care
Yarra CTC commenced in 2015, and has many achievements to date, including the
development of strong collaborations, across high levels of a range of local community
organisations. Yarra CTC is governed by a collaborative partnership of over 24 agencies
and schools that operate in Yarra. The governance structure consists of a Key Leaders
Group (senior members of organisations providing leadership, oversight and strategic
direction) and a Community Board (local service providers delivering programs).
In 2015, Yarra CTC collected robust health and wellbeing information on 357 year 6
students in 13 primary schools and 275 year 8 students in four primary schools across
Yarra. The Yarra CTC Youth Survey findings were used to inform service delivery and
service planning in Yarra. In addition to the CTC Youth Survey, data collection is taking
12
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
place alongside program implementation and will continue throughout the
implementation phase.
Informed by the Yarra CTC Survey Findings, Yarra CTC partners developed a shared
commitment to focus on three priority issues for young people in the middle years and their
families. These agreed priority areas enable partners to focus on achieving outcomes over a
three year period (2016 – 2019). The priority areas are:
(a) reduce alcohol and other drug use
(b) improve personal resilience
(c) strengthen family relationships and management.
A Shared Plan for Action was created based on the three priority areas (see Figure 1
below), which includes six strategies that have a proven record for addressing these
priority areas. It builds on strengths and addresses gaps in existing local practice.
BSEM was selected by the Yarra CTC Key Leaders and Community Board as one of the
programs to address improvements in personal resilience amongst middle years
students. The other strategy selected was support for continuing delivery of the PATHS
(Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) Program across a number of City of Yarra
Primary schools. PATHS has been described as a “preventive intervention program …
which places primary importance on the development of affect … behaviour and cognitive
understanding as they relate to social and emotional competence” [Kam, Greenberg &
Kusche 2004: 67]. Developed in the USA in the 1990s, the PATHS curriculum model
synthesises the three domains of self-control, emotional understanding and social
problem solving in seeking to increase the child’s protective factors and decrease risk
factors.3
Collingwood College’s Primary classes have been implementing elements of the PATHS
syllabus for approximately three years. According to teachers and school leadership, the
BSEM is both a complement to PATHS, and an extension of it. Acknowledging that a
proliferation of Well-being or Social Emotional Learning programs in recent years has
provided them with multiple choices in this area, they cite the whole-school focus of the
BSEM and the rigour of its PD components as fundamental to the decision to trial it. Citing
Stokes & Turnbull (2016) and ongoing evaluation of the Model by the University of
Melbourne, selection of the BSEM as one of the six CTC strategies has been described as
“an obvious choice … it is evidence-informed [and] gives the College an opportunity to
contribute to further evidence gathering as to its worth”.
3 Kam, C, Greenberg, M. & Kusche, C. (2004) Sustained effects of the PATHS curriculum on the social and psychological adjustment of children in Special Education, Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Disorders, 12(2): 66-78.
13
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Implementation of the six Yarra CTC evidence-based programs began in 2016 and
continued throughout 2017. By the end of 2017, a total of 12 CTC programs were
delivered in 10 schools (four secondary and six primary schools) and two community
settings. Programs implemented directly involved 606 middle years’ children and young
people and 32 parents, with some initial positive results. For example, as a result of Yarra CTC,
there was an 11% decrease in the number of packaged liquor outlets in Yarra that sold
alcohol to a young person without asking for identification; 100% of parents participating
in programs reported being more aware of their children’s emotions.
Yarra CTC Action Plan (2016-19)
14
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
The City of Yarra
The City of Yarra encompasses 19.5
square kilometres of metropolitan
Melbourne’s inner-eastern and
northern suburbs, covering
Abbotsford, Burnley, Clifton Hill,
Collingwood, Fitzroy, North Carlton,
North Fitzroy, Princes Hill and
Richmond, as well as parts of
Alphington and Fairfield. According to
the 2016 census, the current
population of 91,000 represents a
23% increase over five years, making
the City of Yarra a the ninth fastest
growing municipality in metropolitan
Melbourne. Yarra is socio-economically and culturally diverse; 38% of the population
were born outside Australia. Inner-city gentrification and demographic shifts have
created a residential mix of affluence and disadvantage: i.e. growing numbers of young
professional families alongside a significant migrant “footprint” and the largest public
housing population in Victoria.4 Educational facilities within the LGA include 24 state
Primary schools and seven secondary settings.
4 Environment and Planning References Committee, Parliament of Victoria Inquiry into the contribution of environmental design to prevention and public health in Victoria. Submission by Yarra City Council June 2011 https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/documents/council/SCEP/EDPH/Subs/No.45_Yarra.pdf
15
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Methodology/ Research Design
Evaluation of the 2017 Collingwood College delivery of the BSEM has drawn on a mix of
qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques in addressing four overarching
questions:
1. Has the BSEM been implemented with high fidelity (as intended) at
Collingwood College?
2. Has BSEM impacted on teacher practice?
3. Has BSEM impacted on student’s wellbeing, engagement and achievement?
4. Has BSEM impacted on school-wide practice?
Data collection was carried out throughout 2017 and during Term 1, 2018. Evaluation
data was drawn from:
(a) focus groups and interviews conducted with students, teachers, school welfare and
school leadership during five visits to the school (in February 2017, September 2017,
February 2018)
(b) a survey conducted with school staff called the “Training Intentions Exit Ticket”
implemented by Berry Street trainers on the last day of PD, and completed by 75% of
College staff (survey was supplied by Berry Street, see Appendix 1)
(c) preliminary interviews and regular updates with:
• the Yarra Communities That Care Program Leader (City of Yarra)
• BSEM trainers.
Table: Summary of data collection Data source Method No.
School leadership (Primary and Secondary Principals) Interview 2
Teachers (2 Primary, 2 Secondary) Interview 4
Teachers participating in training Survey 60
Students (Years 6 & 8) Focus group 7
School Welfare Officer Interview 1
Yarra CTC Program Leader Interview 2
Berry Street trainers Interview 3
TOTAL 79
Other data included in the analysis included:
16
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
• Collingwood College Education administration data, including NAPLAN results
and student well-being data (based on the annual Student Attitude to School
survey), supplied by the school.
• Attendance data, supplied by Collingwood College School Profile 2016 (MySchool
website) and Collingwood College 2016 Annual Report.
Theoretical context: The BSEM The BSEM builds on, and extends, the two-tier ‘healing’ approach characteristic of
traditional or standard models of trauma-informed Learning.
Whereas such initiatives as the Sanctuary and ARC programs (USA) or the Calmer
Classrooms model (Australia) have focused primarily on ‘repairing’ the student and have
proceeded from a ‘deficit’ perspective (i.e. by addressing the student’s developmental
difficulties), the BSEM proceeds from a Strengths base that seeks to enable the student to
build on his or her positive skills and capacities.
The Model proposes three tiers of therapeutic learning and growth, that extend the focus
of previous practice on repairing the student’s regulatory abilities (Domain 1) and
repairing the student’s disrupted attachments (Domain 2), by adding a third domain:
increasing the young person’s psychological resources in order to promote post-
traumatic growth (Domain 3). Where standard models have tended to place initial
emphasis on relationship-building and student engagement, the BSEM underlines the
importance of first addressing the ‘physical’. It responds to compelling neuro-scientific
evidence that teaching needs to address the child’s biological and developmental delays
before he/she can be expected to be ‘ready’ to build relationships or engage with learning
content.
17
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
The process of repairing dysregulated stress responses involves
creation of environments within which young people can learn to
identify and self-regulate negative emotions and impulses, and manage
their behaviour before engaging.
Both the PD training and classroom application of the BSEM are
developmental or sequential. Teachers and students work
progressively through FIVE (sub) domains or Pedagogical lenses,
starting with ‘BODY’/ aka Increasing regulatory abilities, and then progressing through
the sub-domains of STAMINA, ENGAGEMENT and CHARACTER. All are anchored by the
‘lens’ of RELATIONSHIPS. In turn, each of the sub-domains/lenses comprises a cluster of
focus areas/ sub-themes within which are located sets of teaching and intervention
strategies, detailed lesson plans and ‘Brainbreaks’ (i.e. short-burst (2-5 minute) physical
activities that can be woven into class procedure, called upon when needed, or used to
respond to an individual student’s emotional state at any time.
By way of example (and as indicated in the diagram below), within the first sub-domain
of BODY, classroom practice and planning are framed by 4 inter-connected sub-themes:
rhythm, self-regulation, mindfulness, and de-escalation. Focus on the sub-theme of
Rhythm can be articulated, for instance, through recording students’ heart rates (as “a
rhythmic form of body regulation”), or its use in such ‘Brain breaks’ as ‘Silent Ball’, Brain
Gym activities or Call & Response games). Focus on the sub-theme of Self-Regulation
typically includes classroom content around the topic of Stress that seeks to provide
students with ways to identify their own stress responses and different coping strategies.
Within Self-Regulation, focus on Rhythm (and entrenching rhythm and repetition into the
school day) can be articulated by recording students’ heart rates or Brain Gym activities.
Teaching around the sub-theme Mindfulness focuses on the student’s awareness of
his/her physical self and responses, specifically breathing, noticing, listening and “being
Present, centred and grounded”. The sub-theme De-escalation is typically addressed
through class discussion, the creation and use of de-escalation maps, and the
collaborative design of individual safety plans.
Classroom activities within the BODY domain articulate Tier 1 of the Model (i.e. Repairing
self-regulatory abilities) and provide the base/foundation for subsequent delivery of the
BSEM. From BODY teaching progresses through the sequence to CHARACTER (thereby
articulating Tiers 2 and 3 of the Model, i.e. Repairing Relational Capacities and Increasing
psychological resources). Within the RELATIONSHIPS domain, planning and practice
focus around such themes as Attachment, Zen Mood, Unconditional Positive Regard
and Teacher Self-Care. Attachment-based strategies aim to create a safe, inclusive and
inviting environment while the Whole-School Relationships theme encompasses the
concepts of peer respect, shared responsibility for each student and teacher-teacher
18
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
support. Implicit in the theme Unconditional Positive Regard are (a) the importance
of understanding the background and ‘thwarted pathways’ of the child’s development,
and (b) the need to maintain a vision of the child’s ‘wholeness’ (thereby separating the
person from the behaviour).
The STAMINA domain focuses on the development of Emotional Intelligence,
Frustration tolerance and Personal Resilience. The strategy of Growth Mindset (as
opposed to Fixed Mindset) aims to build the child’s stamina for learning. The
ENGAGEMENT domain encompasses utilisation of activities/strategies that ‘grab
students’ attention’, ‘trigger interest’, prime them positively, and help them connect with
learning. The CHARACTER domain draws on Peterson & Seligman’s identification of 24
Significant Strengths and six corresponding Virtues (2004). Focusing on what is ‘right’
within the young person and group, strategies within this domain aim to help students to
articulate personal values, develop respect for others, learn to understand self and others,
and employ their strengths to future pathways.
The BSEM Training Program
Berry Street promotes and disseminates its Model of Education through the combination
of a comprehensive body of teaching resources and curriculum materials that are
underpinned by intensive teacher-training and in-service activity. The rigorous PD
19
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
program, which includes ongoing follow-up and interaction between Berry Street and
various schools, aims:
• to educate participants in re-engaging young people in learning, and progressing
them, through sustained cognitive and behavioural change;
• to develop the capacity of each participant to take strategies back to their
schools/classes and lead changes to school culture and teacher practice;
• to assist teachers in achieving a range of short and long-term educational
outcomes that include improved academic growth, school attendance and well-
being and a decrease in anti-social or challenging behaviours.
The PD sequence (most frequently
offered as a four day course or a suite of
after-hours in-service modules and
seminar/workshops, geared to the
specific setting) includes instruction in
relevant aspects of neuro-scientific
theory; “pedagogical connections to the
National Curriculum, and whole-school
practices for healing and growth”;
practical teaching strategies, skills and
techniques, including detailed advice
on structuring the school day
(reinforced through printed curriculum guides); and strategies for reflective personal
development.5 According to the senior training facilitator, the PD sequence provides
participants and trainers with a forum within which to (a) share research and strategies,
and (b) ensure that these strategies are relatable to self, classroom and whole school
situations.6
In the case of Collingwood College, the sequence has comprised four days of PD delivered
at the school (in December 2016, June and September 2017, and February 2018) plus the
equivalent of two days consultancy.
5 Berry Street Education Model. Frequently Asked Questions, www.childhoodinstitute.org.au/EducationModelFAQs (retrieved 5 May 2015) 6 Interview with Tom Brunzell.
20
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
The BSEM at Collingwood College
Collingwood College
Collingwood College is one of the oldest
State schools in metropolitan Melbourne.
Originating as Vere Street National
School in 1882, its subsequent
incarnations over 135 years have
included Collingwood Domestic Arts,
Girls High and High Schools, and the
ground-breaking Collingwood Education
Centre in the 1980s. It became
Collingwood [P-12] College in 1990.
The school’s evolution having “long reflected the social dynamics of the suburbs it serves”,
the diversity of the district is replicated in both the current enrolment mix and in the
program alternatives on offer. Asked to estimate socio-economic ratios within the school
population, the Primary Principal described 55% of the current Prep year as meeting low
SES and disadvantage criteria; 50% are ESL students.
In addition to its standard mainstream Primary and Secondary streams, the College’s
specialist curriculum options have reportedly induced a growing number of families to
move into the district. School leadership, within a staff of eighty, comprises an overall
College Principal, Primary and Secondary Principals and four Leading teachers.
Two hundred students, including 50% of the Primary cohort, currently undertake the
College’s Steiner program, one of the few deliveries of that pedagogical approach on offer
in a State school setting. (Originally developed in Austria a century ago, Steiner schooling
aims to educate “the whole child” through specific focus on critical thinking, artistic
creativity and cultural enrichment). Starting at Prep, classes extend into Year 10.
Modifications in the middle years enable students to select pathways towards VCE.
Since 2008, Collingwood College has also offered students the Primary school (Prep –
Grade 4) option of the Reggio Emilia program. This team-taught educational approach,
which had its origins in post-Mussolini Italy, is student-led, inquiry-based and ‘village’-
21
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
oriented, aimed at enabling young people to question and think for themselves.7 In 2017,
approximately 60% of the Primary cohort attended Reggio classes, with a number of
parents choosing to travel from outside the LGA in order for their children to take part.
Secondary options include VCAL and VET while a shared class arrangement with Fitzroy
SC maximises VCE subject choices for Year 11 & 12 students.
Challenges faced by the school Senior staff note that recent years have seen a major turnaround in enrolments following
a challenging period of declining numbers. According to Secondary Years Principal Craig
Bradley, a rapid increase has reflected adoption of a deliberate policy of inclusion, based
on the precept “… everyone should be at school”. Taking an approach described as “warm
but strict … our only rules are be here on time, be nice to people, do your best … there’s no
uniform, the kids and teachers are on first name terms”, a changed direction at the school
has impacted on
o the suspension process (“going home if you’re behind in your work is
obviously useless … instead [now] you might be sitting for three days with
the teacher you’ve had conflict with – and catching up”); and
o enrolment and retention protocols (i.e. actively including students who
have been excluded from other settings – or might previously have been
excluded from Collingwood College. “For every ten that we let in … eight
have a story of what’s not worked. Out of the eight, maybe one won’t turn it
around. If we enrol eighty kids in a year, we might lose five [at most]”).
Accordingly, the College is now
o “Taking on kids we would not have done once [and] getting a good
reputation as a mainstream school that caters for all students - including kids
with problems or with additional needs such as mobility, ID or speech issues”,
and
o demonstrating marked improvements in annual data.
The 2017 enrolment of 850 (an increase of more than 100% since 2012) can be said to
reflect the school’s increasing success at student engagement on the one hand, and on the
other, both population growth within the LGA and growing levels of parental satisfaction
with diverse College curricula. School leadership specifically mention the collegiality and
skill of the teaching staff as key contributors to its positive outcomes.
7 For detail on the history and philosophy of the Reggio Emilia program, see Malaguzzi, L. (1998) History, ideas and basic philosophy: an interview with Lella Gandini, in The Hundred Languages of Children: the Reggio Emilia Approach – advanced reflections, 2nd. Edition, ed. C. Edwards, L. Gandini & G. Forman, Westport CT: Ablex Publishing, 49-98.
22
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
These changes notwithstanding, there is acknowledgement that the day-to-day demands
and pressures shared by most urban educational settings in the early 21st century
continue to be compounded at Collingwood College by its particular demographic. School
leadership cite the particular challenges of:
• Significant levels of High SES, on one hand, and of socio-economic disadvantage
on the other, within the student population. School leadership describes the
Collingwood College population as having “one of the highest levels of need in the
State”.
“We have Kids with huge issues … self-harm, school refusal, newly arrived
trauma, language barriers, family violence, mental health issues …both
parents and kids. We do a lot of family welfare … parents using our welfare
team to get mental health plans … Not a day goes by without us dealing
with issues. We get calls from DHS almost daily “.
• Under-resourcing by the Department of Education, resulting in an inadequate
level of specialist support. In 2017, for instance, Collingwood College has been
without the services of a speech pathologist. A psychologist, formerly based at
the school one day a week, currently provides consultancy only. Two part-time
social workers (1.0 EFT) are stretched to support students from Prep to Year 10.
School leadership suggests that the school’s public profile has been somewhat “skewed”
or “camouflaged” by (a) its willingness to explore alternative approaches (like Steiner
and Reggio Emilia) and (b) gentrification of some parts of the LGA. They point out that
their Steiner enrolments reflect neither the overall cultural or socio-economic diversity
of the district. (By way of example, one early years Steiner class of 24 children includes
only one EAL student and only three students from low SES families). In mainstream
classes, an average 54% of students are identified as disadvantaged. 23% of enrolments
are seen as ‘vulnerable across the board’.
Why the BSEM?
Awareness of the need to focus explicitly on domains of student well-being and self-
esteem, and on development of effective classroom behaviour and learning strategies,
prompted the school to introduce the PATHS program, at Prep-Year 6, in 2014. While
conceding the value of PATHS, as both “a good resource” and “a great program”, staff
have reported that its impact to date has been “limited” and that student and teacher
interest has been waning. Having identified a continuing need to address Student
resilience (i.e. in responding to the CTC survey), it was suggested that augmenting
PATHS with another approach might more effectively address the issue.
23
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Enthusiastic feedback from individual teachers who had trained with Berry Street
together with the offer of co-funding by Yarra CTC provided the impetus to trial the
BSEM across the school. In the view of one teacher interviewee “the Berry Street stuff is
better than PATHS … more useful … [and] more accessible, more adaptable…. Loads of
activities can be slotted in and changed as needed”. Conversely, there has been some
feeling that PATHS and BSEM can be complementary, that “bits of both BSEM and PATHS
will be immensely useful” or that “Berry Street sits nicely with it [PATHS]”.
School leadership argues that, fundamental to whole-school roll-out of the BSEM, has
been recognition of
(a) the need for deeper teacher insight/understanding of the reality of many
students’ lives; and
(b) the need for an enlightened consistency across the school in the way students
are disciplined, engaged and monitored.
With a nod to the significant proportion of Collingwood College teachers who are recent
graduates, the Secondary Years Principal has observed:
“When I trained to be a teacher, I didn’t train to be a social worker, a psychologist, a care worker, a councillor … I spent the first six or seven years doing a pretty good job as a teacher … but still couldn’t figure out ‘why that kid was crazy’ … This was me saying OK - Let’s take a step back: everybody’s in the same boat, we don’t know why we keep having problems with little Johnny … [BSEM training] was the closest thing to PD that, even at the end of it if no one does any of these lessons, they can’t ever say ‘Well I wasn’t shown or I didn’t know why shouting at a kid that’s upset isn’t a good idea’ …. OK … It’s PD for teachers that you hope then some champions will come out and will start leading change within the classroom”.
24
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Findings
Has the BSEM been implemented with high fidelity?
1. The Training: preparation of the teachers to implement the BSEM
Training in the BSEM has been provided on-site (i.e. at Collingwood College) by Berry
Street trainers. They confirm that school leadership’s strong commitment to
introducing the Model has been demonstrated by preparedness to facilitate
participation by all teaching personnel (including Education support staff and student
teachers). 80-plus staff members participated. (13 student leaders also took part in one
day – Day 3 – of the PD).
Citing instances at other schools where unforeseen disruptions have necessitated
running only shortened version variant of the full training program, Tom Brunzell notes
that: “At Collingwood we’ve been able to deliver the PD as it has been designed … and,
hence, maximise what we can offer … We have not had to change or abridge anything … ”
Consultation days, designed to provide time for requisite follow-up and individualised
feedback, included an ‘emergency’ session on anxiety-reduction strategies for VCE
teachers immediately prior to exams. In summary, the BSEM was delivered as designed
and at a high quality, with the school able and prepared to commit the necessary time and
resources to the PD.
The PD program has not been without minor challenges. Reference has been made in
interview to:
• Timetabling constraints that necessitated scheduling the first day’s training on
the last day of Term IV, i.e. immediately prior to school holidays. While
unanimously conceded to be “hardly ideal timing”, there was similar agreement
that the overall response has been very positive (indeed, more so than
anticipated by the trainers). The wisdom of Berry Street opting to provide a
‘refresher’ session on BODY, for newcomers and other interested teachers, at the
start of the school year, has been acknowledged.
• Less than ideal physical spaces for whole staff training sessions. Three sessions
were held in the school’s overly large performing arts centre, a traditional
theatrical space that tended to enable staff to spread out across the seating and
tacitly encourage a one-way performer to audience dynamic. Relocating the PD
to the school library (on Days 3 and 4) enabled participants to group themselves
around tables. While more conducive to interaction, the benefits were somewhat
compromised by the size of the space (eighty participants in a room capable of
comfortably accommodating 40).
25
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Members of the training team note that these factors (plus the task of winning over
teachers who might – for various reasons - be “somewhat resistant”) “tested [our]
engagement skills”, but they acknowledge their usefulness (as with every delivery of the
training) in providing them with opportunities to reflect on ‘What is working well?’,
‘What could be more effective?’, etc. Emphasising that the BSEM PD program remains a
work in progress, and that “We want people to have an experience through the PD”. One
trainer observes:
“We have been constantly playing around with where & how we order the day so
that people have a peak of positive emotion …. Then they get deep then come back
up into a peak of positive emotion. We then do a ‘brain break’ … So we’re really
trying to get that rhythm …. And ultimately we’re trying to keep people in flow …
We’re trying to challenge them just enough where they’re challenged but not so
much where they’re feeling anxious or too little where they’re feeling bored ….
We’re trying to keep them in that peak performance zone”.
Trainer reports of the enthusiastic and positive responses they have encountered have
been strongly reinforced by feedback from school leadership and teachers (both in
interview and by survey), indicating:
(a) very high levels of satisfaction with the PD (see figures below), and
(b) general agreement that both style and content have successfully engaged
teachers ‘across the board’, i.e. have appealed to the school’s mix of very
experienced educators and relative newcomers to the profession.
Interviewees have applauded for the trainers for the user-friendly construction of each
training day, and for having paced the sessions in a way that “honours a human being’s
need to move”. The presentations themselves have been described as “highly” or “very
engaging”, “excellent”, “inspiring” and “absolutely outstanding”. One very senior
classroom teacher has observed: “Although I often think I have ‘seen it all before’, I’m
here to learn just like everybody else and being bored by [PD] is disappointing … there are
nuances in this [the BSEM] which actually add to what I’m doing in the classroom … and
that’s been wonderful”.
The Secondary Years Principal describes the overall “resonance” of the PD with staff as
“implicit”. Noting a strong bureaucratic focus in 2017 on changes to the Victorian
curriculum, he has observed: “So far no one has questioned why we’re doing [the BSEM]
rather than training about the curriculum … Clearly they prefer to be doing Berry Street”.
Notwithstanding some mild scepticism at the outset (“a bit of an air of we don’t need this
… we’re all different here and you’re trying to give us a common approach”), there is
agreement that a genuine openness to the Model was apparent by Day 2 of the training.
26
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
A survey of training participants (collected by the trainers at the final PD session)
strongly reinforces the positive interview feedback. Asked to reflect on ways in which
the PD had enriched both their learning and teaching, respondents made persistent
reference to coming away with:
• a better understanding of themselves
• new ways of thinking about challenging students
• heightened awareness of how to support and teach trauma-affected students
• feeling validated in their approaches and ideas they have implemented (“I’ve
picked up a few tricks since 1985!” was one response)
• a common language, enabling uniformity across the school when “identifying the
positive aspects of students and staff and how they enable growth”. ( “I am pleased
the school may now be on the same page” was one comment).
• understanding the importance of modelling desired behaviours
• understanding that every student has unique strengths and focusing on positive
rather than negative
• a multiplicity of supporting resources, practical and realistic ideas, strategies and
activities
Survey responses strongly confirmed interview reports of enthusiasm for the PD. Asked
to nominate the components of the BSEM they had found most useful in the classroom:
• 10% of respondents nominated ALL domains and elements; a further 42%
nominated several elements within each DOMAIN (eg. three out of four elements
within BODY; 5 elements within RELATIONSHIPS; three elements within
STAMINA; four within ENGAGEMENT; three within CHARACTER).
• 51% nominated elements within the ENGAGEMENT domain as ‘most useful’ in
the classroom(18% nominated Play Humour & Fun)
• 60% nominated elements within the CHARACTER domain
• 60% nominated elements within the BODY domain
• 60% nominated elements within the RELATIONSHIPS domain
• 70% of survey respondents nominated elements within the STAMINA domain as
most useful (of these, 36% nominated Growth Mindset and 36% Resilience)
While these figures testify to the capacity of concepts/ activities across ALL five
domains to engage the PD participants and to impact productively on their classroom
practice, it suggests that elements within STAMINA have been ‘most beneficial’ in
practice to date.
27
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
2. Program Roll-out
Notwithstanding trainer concern that the hiatus between the first training day (at the
end of Term 4, 2016) and roll-out of the BODY domain in class (at the start of the 2017
school year) might dilute enthusiasm for trying out the PD, school leadership was able
to report that “the work on the BODY is already having an impact” only a few weeks into
Term 1. While at that point greater enthusiasm was being expressed by younger staff (in
both age and experience) , instances were cited of more experienced teachers agreeing
that “this is good”. Interviews late in the year indicated that the BSEM had been
introduced to the students with varying levels of rigour; however “everyone has taken
on something … there have been lots of different starting points”.
It has been suggested that the non-mandatory way the Model was introduced to the
staff may have been an important factor in its generalised take-up. According to
Secondary Years Principal:
“… At the time when I was planning this - if I’d gone and said ‘We’re all gonna pick
this model up we’re all gonna do it’ … which is what we did with PATHS, there are
people that jump straight on the train, people that stick on the platform and people
that are going in totally the opposite direction. We did lots of training but PATHS
wasn’t a great success here … This [BSEM] is a different approach. No pressure if
you see something good you can use it … In talking it through in a different setting,
people are just making that jump”.
The key challenge in rolling-out the BSEM has been incorporating content into already
very tight timetables. Lack of time has limited opportunities for the classroom
observation component of the training (for instance). The secondary school principal,
who has taken on responsibility for the BSEM in addition to his general administrative
duties, highlights the desirability (in future) of releasing a teacher part-time to co-
ordinate delivery and monitoring of the program. (See Recommendations).
Primary teacher interviewees have reported finding the BSEM highly compatible with
both the Steiner & Reggio Emilia philosophies. For instance:
“A lot of things that they identify as Best Practice, Steiner teachers already do - loads
of movement, rhythmic activity, breaking up the day . Initially, there was some
feeling among teachers in the younger [Steiner] classes, that the BSEM was offering
nothing new …. because ‘I’m already doing it’ … What they’ve found the Model gives
us [however] are the more explicit activities like De-escalation charts and Safety
plans, and [the value of] working on those with particular students” [Steiner teacher]
28
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
“The BSEM in Reggio aligns thoroughly with Reggio … We have lots of meetings …
discussions about opinions, backing up opinions, constructing theories and
explaining them to other people. We’re already talking about resilience, about
meeting people you might not want … how to deal with these situations” [Reggio
Emilia teacher]
Teachers within the Primary classes appear to have been at an advantage in rolling out
the BSEM. “Developing relationships is much simpler if you have the kids the whole time”,
acknowledges one teacher who has utilised class time previously allocated to PATHS (“so
it’s constant”) to deliver activities within the Model. At the same time, it should be noted
that a number of Secondary teachers have been enterprising in using Home group time
(30 minutes each morning) as their delivery vehicle. Inspired by the first day of training,
and keen to make their class spaces more inviting, two Middle Years teachers shopped
for rocking chairs and set up a ‘chill out’ corner before Term 1 started. In working
through the BSEM domains, they note that “jumping back and forth” (i.e. continually
revisiting the BODY domain) has been effective: “If the kids are anxious about something
… if exams are coming up [for example] we go back to those [early] strategies … talk about
de-escalation, how they might be feeling, use the charts, maybe some Mindful colouring”.
Enthusiastic take-up of the BSEM by these and other Middle Years staff has prompted the
establishment of ‘Mindfulness Monday’ for the school’s Year 9 cohort.
“Monday is a really good day for it … it brings the kids back into routine for the week.
It took two terms for the kids to understand … and at the start they were a bit
sceptical [but] because we’ve been consistent with it, they now know they’ll be
meditating and calming down for 25 minutes on a Monday”.
Unsurprisingly, opportunities have been more limited for single subject teachers. (“There
are just not enough hours in the day” was one lament). However, staff report that
‘Brainbreaks’ are being used across the school (“Sometimes when I think they’re not
getting a lot of what I’m telling them , I think ‘let’s do the classical [Brainbreak] thing …”).
BSEM components have also been part-and-parcel of a strong emphasis on Mental Health
& Well-being in the Secondary Health & PE syllabus.
29
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Has the BSEM impacted on Teacher Practice?
1. Impact on Professional Learning
Having praised the engagement capacity of the BSEM training, interviewees likewise
confirmed its value as Professional Learning in the areas of traumatology and
alternative pedagogies. For instance:
• Echoing comments made by graduate teachers at other settings8, interviewees described
the training and the suite of reference booklets as “a godsend to young teachers”, in many
cases unprepared by their “patchy” undergraduate training or limited experiences on
practicum for “behaviour management … [and] the whole pastoral care thing”.
• Perceived as having been highly productive in increasing the knowledge of relatively
new practitioners, the BSEM has also been described as “still enriching for more
experienced teachers”.
“I think that every teacher can continuously build in these things and revisit them
constantly in order to just make the experience for the kids outstanding …”
A recurrent theme at interview was the value of the BSEM in encouraging and
promoting personal reflection. One teacher expressed particular pleasure at the way the
training and implementation of the BSEM were validating her practice and skill level.
“ I started to cotton on to this [trauma-informed approach] a few years ago and little by little build it into my practice … I’ve loved going to training and feeling reinforced by it …[It’s great] When there is something that comes along and pats me on the back but also gives me a few more things to think about … There’s always more you can do - and that’s what makes me an excellent teacher, not just a mediocre teacher”.
2. Changes to teacher practice
Reference was made to the value of BSEM training in providing all practitioners - and
not just those new to alternative pedagogies - with
o a “common language”, i.e. immediately understandable terminology which
can usefully be applied to both innovative curriculum elements and “stuff
already being done”; and
o A readily accessible tool-box of practical strategies, activities and ideas.
8 Stokes & Turnbull, p.32
30
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Interviewees provided several examples of changes to their own practice through
utilising this terminology and toolbox that have proved beneficial. Two Secondary
teacher interviewees, for instance, reported having immediately introduced the BODY
domain at the start of Term 1, and noted the efficacy of compiling de-escalation charts,
instituting regular brainbreaks and facilitating discussions around physical responses to
stress at a time when
“… They’re in a new class … some teachers are new … it’s a new year … some have
been separated from their friends … NAPLAN is coming up … and they’re dealing
with lots of things … The start of the year is hard and [these activities] did make it
easier for everyone”.
Other examples were provided by (a) a Secondary English teacher who reported:
“I had a double English … and I could see the kids thought ‘This is hard!’ We were
doing Silent reading & silent writing. We’re not a silent class by any means [and] I
could see them struggling. Halfway through I said; ‘Everybody on your feet – and
we did the one-two-three [thumb pointing activity ] … ‘Turn to your partners and
do the same’ . It was just a five minute thing … They just needed that UP”.
(b) Another Secondary teacher who noted:
“Whenever I start something new with the students that I know they’re going to
find a challenge, we have a whole Growth MINDSET lesson to really push them
forward. Growth Mindset was really been taken on”.
(c) a Primary teacher who reported:
“I [used] Brainbreaks in class during this year’s NAPLAN ... – quietly for the kids
who needed it – in Year 5 you can tell kids who are crumbling … the impromptu
feeling ‘this kid’s not managing’ – I Can’t tell you what they would have got
without – but [Brainbreaks] allowed them to let go that anxiety and keep going –
and to come out feeling like they’d given their best. … I [certainly] would do more
brainbreaks next time”
And (d) another [Early] Primary teacher who cited the value of asking students to
record reading (including Silent reading) milestones in a reading log (“That really
pushes them forward”).
3. Changes in Student-Teacher relationships
While all interviewees expressed confidence in the quality of their interactions with
their students prior to the BSEM, there was clear recognition that BSEM training had
31
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
reinforced their insight into the students’ needs and how best to solidify the teacher-
student relationship. According to one teacher: “When a child is talking – I remind
myself: it’s because he or she needs to talk … and I need to focus on what else might be
happening ”.
Others highlighted the usefulness to their day-to-day interactions of:
• the BSEM concept of Unconditional Positive Regard:
o “Unconditional Positive Regard just means ‘how can that kid get under your
skin? – he’s funny and he’s quirky and individual and by just using
strategies to manage how he is in the room he just gets to be himself”.
o “Every child has a right to be here and they all have something to offer and
it’s my job to find out what that is. So if they’re shouting - that’s not cool and
that needs to stop - but I can’t write them off. They definitely have
something to offer … Sometimes it’s really hard to find and it takes a while -
but it’s there”.
• And the flow-on benefits of facilitating a calm and focused learning environment.
Confessing that “as a beginning teacher, I remember getting angry about
everything”, one teacher acknowledged:
“It protects me from so much frustration … It puts into words what I’ve
been trying to say ‘I respect you too much to argue too much to argue about
whether or not that’s a hat ‘… Far out, that’s magic … Now my blood
pressure doesn’t rise … I have more positive feelings. I love my job and
[reflection] allows me to keep doing that and not feeling like ‘I’m trapped
with this child and I can’t get them to learn’ and that’s incredibly
frustrating’. And that is important because it protects teachers”.
Several interviewees stressed the importance of continuing to maintain the momentum
with regards to the BSEM. A large sector of the staff having been exposed to “new
material”, one teacher stressed the imperative of ensuring that the PD be reinforced
through rigorous classroom application: “When the training finishes, we can’t just let it
peter out …This is actually the bread and butter of what we do …”.
32
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Has the BSEM impacted on Student Engagement, Well-being and Achievement?
1. Understanding of BSEM domains and Increased Self-awareness
Just as teachers have differed in the ways (and extent to which) they have introduced
BSEM components into the classroom, so have they differed in what they have chosen to
call the program. In some Primary classes, for instance, the children’s previous
exposure to PATHS, has enabled teachers to continue to refer to activities or lessons
with ‘We’re doing some PATHS work now’. One Reggio Emilia teacher has found that
grouping BSEM components under the umbrella of ‘Being Calm and Kind’ has been
effective. Alternatively, some classes group such concepts as ‘being Present Centred
Grounded’ or ‘de-escalation’ as ‘Well-being stuff’, while others (generally in Secondary)
“definitely know they’re doing Berry Street if they are having a [brain] break”.
Regardless (and notwithstanding that primary teaching staff have had greater scope to
reinforce BSEM messages with their students than have their secondary counterparts)
student focus groups near the end of the pilot indicated that a number of BSEM terms,
learned at the outset of the pilot, were continuing to resonate with young people in both
Primary and Secondary grades. Focus group participants specifically confirmed having
“taken on”:
• ‘Growth Mindset’ (“I usually try to do new things … sometimes I can’t actually do
some things but I usually try”),
• Resilience (“If you can’t do something well, you try again, you don’t just give up
and go home” or “being able to [withstand] some pressures … pick yourself up
[after a setback]”), and
• Mindfulness (variously defined as “really thinking about what you’re doing [like]
mindfully putting things away …”, “awareness” or “being in yourself”);
• Present Centred Grounded (‘being calm … being peaceful’) and
• Zen Zone (“being calm”, “being Present Centred Grounded”, “[in] a comfortable
space”)
However, it should be noted that the amount of time dedicated to BSEM and its concepts
varied amongst teachers.
2. Impact of BSEM on Student well-being
In terms of the BSEM assisting young people in development of coping or adaptive
behaviour, Years 5/6 students confirmed the usefulness of :
33
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
• Mood charts (filled in twice a day – “up for not stressed, down for stressed”) in
helping alert teachers when they felt unready for learning;
• De-escalation charts (“like a de-stress chart … tells you how to calm down”);
• SAFETY PLANS. Individual Safety plans were described as including such
strategies as
“Writing down who you can talk to [if stressed or anxious] … mum, dad, my
older sister, the teacher”
“Punch the pillow, Watch YouTube, hang out with my [older] brother”
“If I’m really anxious – I would sit down and watch TV … to take my mind
off it … not just sit and think and make it worse”
“Try reasoning, and then if it doesn’t get any better, go to the teacher and
ask ‘Can I have some time out’”.
• A variety of Brainbreaks - including short silent meditation sessions as part of
home group (duration decreasing over time as students learned to ‘settle down’
more quickly) and ‘Mindful drawing’ - had been “enjoyed” by the students and
were described as both “a good idea” and a way to “focus”.
Year 7/8 students echoed their Primary counterparts in citing the practical value of
both Safety Plans (expressing confidence that they had people they could go to in a time
of crisis or difficulty) and Brain breaks (notwithstanding a little uncertainty about the
term, noting that some teachers “are pretty into that stuff”, they reported having tried
and utilised various breathing exercises, ‘counting our pulses’, variations on ‘silent ball’,
thumb pointing, etc).
Overall, student feedback indicates a clear understanding and recognition of the link
between stress and not being able to learn effectively, and associated individualised
‘calming’ strategies. For example:
• One Year 5/6 student, who admitted to sometimes “losing it” at school (“[Some-
times] I can’t control myself … Last time I got [really] angry … I stormed out of the
room but came back [too early] and punched the guy”), conceded that becoming
Present Centred Grounded (defined by him as “calming down … being ready for
work”) would have been a better option. “Next time [he suggested] I’ll go
somewhere where no one’s near me and kick a soccer ball as hard as I can”).
• Other students cited the usefulness of “finding your own space” , “listening to a lot
of music”, “sometimes doing nothing”, “using a comfy chair at home” or “just going
34
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
for a walk … If you’re stressed about something and its right in front of you can’t
really stop and think about it. You need to go somewhere else”. Comments
included:
“If I do get stressed I have my own way of dealing with it … look at what’s
making me stressed, think about it and try and get rid of it”
“I’ve seen our teacher – if someone is stressed, they move them, deal with
them and talk to them”.
It should be noted that all focus group participants reported liking school – or, more
accurately, their current school. While they hesitated to call their respective class or
home-rooms calm, they described them as unstressed environments where students
generally got along well together. Focus group participants uniformly cited positive
relationships with their class or home-group teachers.
3. Impact of the BSEM on Student achievement & engagement
It would be a vast oversimplification, inaccurate (and, indeed, too early) to attempt to
directly ascribe positive shifts in Collingwood College’s annual school data to BSEM
training and program dissemination. Rather, it is generally agreed, roll-out of the BSEM
has been just one contributing factor within the ‘bigger picture’. Its introduction has
coincided with – and been part of – the school’s strategic focus on improving student
performance against statewide averages (specifically annual AUSVELS, NAPLAN and
SASS results), and attendance and school completion data. Targets set in the school’s
latest Strategic plan (2015-18) included such projections as:
• A 10% increase by 2018 in the number of students performing at A or B levels in
AUSVELS
• 85% of students to show medium to high growth in NAPLAN by 2018
• Student attendance to increase by 2018 (as evidenced by absences falling below
the state average)
• Annual SASS results to demonstrate improved student satisfaction (at or above
the 75th percentile by 2018) within such Engagement and Well-being variables as
school connectedness, learning confidence, student safety and classroom
behaviour.
As regards Student achievement, progress towards these goals, two years into the four
year time-frame, was confirmed in the 2016 Annual Report: The Report noted (for
example) that, in terms of state averages:
• AusVELS results were within the middle 60% of Victorian schools (and similar
35
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
• to like schools)
• NAPLAN Year 5 results for Reading were within the top 20% of schools,
Numeracy in the middle 60% of schools (in both cases higher than like schools)
• NAPLAN Year 7 was well above state median in both Reading and Numeracy.
• NAPLAN Year 9 results for Reading and Numeracy were above the state median
In terms of Engagement & Well-being, the 2016 Annual Report confirmed that results
for Connectedness to School and Student Safety variables on SASS 2016 were within
the middle band (at Primary level) and within the top 20% of schools (at Secondary
level). The following year SASS 2017 confirmed that Strategic plan targets were being
met, with results for such variables as Effective classroom behaviour, Resilience,
Connectedness, School safety Self-regulation and Confidence all at or above (in some
cases significantly above) the 75th percentile.
While more than one interviewee suggested that these changed need to be viewed with
some caution (given the socio-economic diversity of the student mix), improvements in
annual data would seem to reflect a school culture open to alternative pedagogies and
innovation. Receptiveness to the Berry Street philosophy is evidenced by the school’s
previous subscription to the PATHS program, and by such interview comments as
“I feel like it already is how we do it at Collingwood”
“I feel we’re a school that [already] had Mindfulness and all those kind of things as
a focus”
“The things [teachers] were already focused on … [the training] reinforced that and
emphasised that”
“I think the people who work here are really passionate about what they do, &
about social justice, diversity and all those underlying values … I don’t think they’d
be here if they didn’t … and I think that’s what connects them with Berry Street…
that’s what’s special about this school”.
It should be noted that the Primary Principal anticipates a further – and marked -
upward shift in Engagement & Well-being in the next set of SASS data (2018), and he
feels confident in drawing a link between that anticipated change and staff enthusiasm
for the BSEM
“It fits well with both Steiner and Reggio … If the staff are enjoying … and the kids
are responding, it is having an impact”.
36
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
Has the BSEM impacted on school-wide practice? While the take-up of BSEM has varied from teacher to teacher, school leadership believes that the
impact of the Model is being felt across Collingwood College. According to interviewees:
“[There’s] Lots happening school wide! Berry Street features in all classrooms across the
school”.
“The training was a breath of fresh air ... Every teacher in the school has one of those kids
that the PD was talking about. And I think everyone sat there and said ‘I know who that is’
and now I know how I can help them succeed”.
The Primary Principal reports that the BSEM is already “heavily embedded” in the school’s
strategic planning, and that this has begun to “filter down to teacher performance plans. … All
staff should have a goal that relates back to learnings from the BSEM”. In the Primary classes,
inclusion of Berry Street learnings and practice on the fortnightly agenda for Learning
Communities (i.e. Professional Learning Teams) meetings (“where teachers discuss and reflect
on both BSEM and our PATHS program”) is reportedly helping align delivery of Model
components as children progress through the year levels.
It is conceded that take-up of BSEM elements has been strongest at Primary years. Even so,
interviewees have noted having witnessed “a lot of work in [Secondary] home groups” or having
observed classes work on character strengths. While it is probably too early to see formal
alignment of BSEM content from Year 7 to 12, it is noted that, at a micro-level, Year 9 teachers
who adopted the BSEM with particular enthusiasm in 2017, have reportedly shared their
learnings at transition meetings in the hope that Year 10 home group teachers will “take a similar
approach”. If so, they are confident that the “benefits will travel through”.
In acknowledging of the BSEM’s wider usefulness/applicability, interview and post-PD survey
responses included:
“… while it’s about strategies for helping trauma-affected children engage in education, it
benefits all the children”.
“There are a lot of individual students here with complex backgrounds. [Because of the PD]
teachers can learn how to work with these students – using a program that would have
benefits for all students”.
“I like the focus on children in most need, but that it’s flexible enough to apply to all,
including different classrooms, programs, etc”.
37
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
A summary of Challenges & Enablers in delivery of the BSEM
Conclusion: Where to next?
With well-received training having inspired and/or encouraged BSEM-related activity
across the school, the Primary Principal suggests that the biggest challenge ahead will
be keeping up the momentum. With a staff allocation unable to stretch to a full-time
Well-being co-ordinator (with specific release time to co-ordinate the Pilot) chief
responsibility for the BSEM in 2017 was taken on by the Secondary Principal. Given the
multiple other demands on his time, this was a less than ideal situation (see
recommendations). Given the need to support staff in keeping abreast of current
research in their individual Berry Street ‘journeys’, the need to facilitate formal
integration of BSEM into the whole-school syllabus, and the need to ensure that new
Challenges Enablers Ensuring that teachers are fully briefed
on the model and are comfortable in
utilising strategies and activities.
Rigorous PD in Berry Street principles,
supported by curriculum booklets
Co-ordination of the program in-
school by a teacher committed to the
BSEM philosophy (and with sufficient
time to provide necessary support)
Refresher sessions and follow-up
consultancies by berry street staff
Accommodating the training program
within very busy school timetables
Refresher sessions and whole school
commitment to maximising impact of
BSEM
Ensuring suitable accommodation for PD A space that encourages interaction
and engagement (At Collingwood
College, this involved relocating the PD
to the school library)
Inconsistencies in BSEM delivery Ensuring whole-school roll-out
supported by Berry Street refresher
sessions, regular staff & team
meetings, and co-ordination by senior
teacher
Difficulties in Integrating BSEM processes
into everyday teaching
Ensuring whole-school roll-out of the
Model
Embedding BSEM into the school
curriculum
Ensuring effective timetabling of training
sessions (In some instances, training has
taken place late afternoon or immediately
before school vacations)
The high quality of the PD and the
capacity of the Berry Street presenters
to engage training participants
38
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
staff are able to ‘immerse’ themselves in BSEM principles, it has been suggested (in
interview and survey):
a. that Collingwood College continue its engagement with Berry Street
through refresher sessions, individual consultations, etc. (See
Recommendations). “There are not enough hours in the day”, according to
school leadership, “But it’s not an impossible task … Our immediate goal is
keeping the BSEM on the agenda and ensuring it is firmly embedded in our
classrooms”. ; and
b. that the school attempt, where possible, to ensure that co-ordination of
BSEM activities is a formal part of an appropriately credentialed Leading
Teacher’s workload.
Taking the longer term view, and noting that introducing the BSEM has been the first of
a number of linked interventions under the College-CTC umbrella, the Secondary
Principal has observed:
“In two years’ time when anybody walks in, no one will remember why we’re a
BSEM school … it’s just the way it is, and it’ll be in the DNA. Now every new
teacher gets a sheet of paper … [telling them] that’s how we deal with behaviour at
this school, …that’s how we deal with keeping kids controlled, getting them centred
… that’s how we do it round here … You change your behaviours to fit in … If you’re
not told, down the line that’s where you get conflict … We’ll get to the point where
everyone who starts gets inducted into BSEM … You should be able to walk
through and hear ‘We use the BSEM model … every Monday we do mindfulness’”.
Recommendations
Feedback from interviewees and through a post-training survey (distributed and
collected by Berry Street staff) confirms the author’s assessment that:
(a) the BSEM has been implemented with high fidelity at Collingwood College
(b) the BSEM has impacted positively on teacher practice at the school
(c) the BSEM is impacting positively on student well-being, engagement and
achievement
(d) [while it is still early days] there are indications the BSEM is impacting
positively on school-wide practice.
39
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
In view of the overall success of the BSEM Pilot in these regards, and following discussion
with Yarra CTC as to future direction of the initiative, the following actions are
recommended:
a. That, in order to ensure to maximise the efficiency, consistency and rigour
of Collingwood College’s ongoing subscription to the BSEM, that
responsibility for co-ordination & implementation be made a designated
part of a suitably-qualified Leading Teacher’s role;
b. Given strong interest (in survey responses) in further access to trauma-
informed educational research and the sharing of ‘coalface’ experiences
and strategies, that Collingwood College be encouraged to become involved
in Berry Street’s Alumni program;
c. That new staff be provided with the opportunities to complete Berry Street
training;
d. That the school progress its relationship with Berry Street through
commissioning follow-up and refresher sessions;
e. Interest having been expressed in extending BSEM training to students,
that student leaders be invited to participate in future follow-up sessions
or refresher seminars. (While group of secondary students did participate
in one session in 2017, staff changes and timetabling constraints ruled out
further involvement in the PD);
f. Given the recent timing of the Pilot that the school continue to monitor
annual SASS data and other achievement indicators in the interests of
assessing longer-term impact of the BSEM.
In looking at the ‘bigger picture’, i.e. possible expansion of CTC’s BSEM partnerships into
other schools, and based on findings from multiple implementations of the BSEM, it is
recommended that:
• Participating schools seek to ensure school-wide (rather than sectional or year
level) implementation of the BSEM. (This enables integration of strategies,
activities and BSEM elements into school curricula and facilitates alignment of
BSEM elements across year levels. Likewise it helps promote consistency of
approach across the school spectrum);
• Further to the above, that in taking on the BSEM, the school commit (a) to ensuring
ALL staff are able to undertake the PD and training component, and (b) that
40
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
sufficient resources and time are allocated to enable Berry Street trainers to
maximise their delivery of the PD content;
• Where possible, the school make every effort to ensure that a dedicated teacher,
with specifically-allocated time-release, etc, take on responsibility for overall co-
ordination of the BSEM.
References Brunzell, T. (2014). Trauma Informed Positive Education at the Berry Street School. Melbourne: Berry Street Victoria. Retrieved from www.berrystreet.org.au 28 April 2015 Brunzell, T., Abbott, L. & Sheehan, R. (eds) (2015) The Berry Street Education Model: Curriculum and Classroom Strategies, Melbourne: Berry Street Victoria. Brunzell, T., Waters, L., & Stokes, H. (2015). Teaching with strengths in trauma-affected students: A new approach to healing and growth in the classroom. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85, 1, 3-9. Stokes, H. & Turnbull, M. (2016) Evaluation of the Berry Street Education Model: Trauma-informed positive education enacted in mainstream schools, Melbourne: Youth Research Centre, University of Melbourne
41
The Collingwood College BSEM Pilot: an evaluation
APPENDIX
Post-PD survey collected from CC teacher participants in the Berry Street training