Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology

The impact of brief teacher training on classroom management and child behavior inat-risk preschool settings: Mediators and treatment utility

James Snyder ⁎, Sabina Low, Tara Schultz, Stacy Barner, Desirae Moreno, Meladee Garst, Ryan Leiker,Nathan Swink, Lynn SchrepfermanWichita State University, United States

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of PsychUniversity Wichita, Kansas 67260-0034, United Stafax: +(316) 978-3086.

E-mail address: james.snyder@wichita.edu (J. Snyde

0193-3973/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Aldoi:10.1016/j.appdev.2011.06.001

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 5 January 2010Received in revised form 16 May 2011Accepted 7 June 2011Available online 6 August 2011

Keywords:Teacher behavior management trainingChild conduct problemsAt-risk preschool childrenPeer group

Teachers from fourteen classrooms were randomly assigned to an adaptation of Incredible Years (IY) teachertraining or to teacher training-as-usual. Observations were made of the behavior of 136 target preschool boysand girls nominated by teachers as having many or few conduct problems. Peer and teacher behavior wereobserved at baseline and post training. IY training resulted in increases in teachers' positive and reductions inteachers' negative behavior relative to training as usual, in decreased peer negative behavior toward targetchildren, and in decreased negative behavior of target children high on conduct problems. The impact of IYtraining on the behavior of target children was mediated by changes in peers' behavior with no direct effectsof teacher behavior and differential effects for high and low conduct problem children. Teacher trainingfocused on altering the whole classroom environment may be an effective strategy, even for children withsignificant conduct problems.

ology Box 34 Wichita Statetes. Tel.: +(316) 978-3058;

r).

l rights reserved.

© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Children's behavioral and emotional self-regulation, cooperationand compliance, attention to instruction, and adherence to classroomroutines provide the foundation for academic success in earlyelementary school. Kindergarten teachers report the primary challengeto academic success involves children's teachability rather thanchildren's specific cognitive skills and academic preparation. Themost common concerns are difficulty following directions, staying ontask, working independently, and poor social skills (Rimm-Kaufman,Pianta, & Cox, 2000). A substantial number of preschool children showdeficits in these foundational capacities. Estimates of the prevalence ofchildren with significant conduct and self-regulatory problems in earlychildhood programs range from 10 to 35% (Joseph & Strain, 2003).Children are expelled from pre-K programs at three times the rate ofchildren in K-12th grades (President's New Freedom Commission onMental Health, 2003). Without effective early intervention, childrenwith significant conduct problems are at increased risk for rejection byteachers and peers, academic failure, and later antisocial behavior(Snyder, Patterson, & Reid, 2003).

This has led to several efforts to enhance teachers' classroommanagement skills based on social learningmodels which posit that thesocial routines, instructions and contingencies teachers provide for childbehavior in the classroom are the proximal mechanisms bywhich child

self-regulatory skills, attention deployment and social competence areshaped in educational settings. While substantial progress has beenmade in the development of efficacious and effective teacher trainingprograms (e.g., Walker et al., 1998; Webster-Stratton, Reid, &Hammond, 2004), continued progress may be fostered by attention tothree issues. First, given the limited resources available to many earlyeducation programs, it is important to explore the efficacy of relativelyefficient single-component interventions to enhance teachers' class-room management skills. Most studies of teacher training have alsoincorporated parenting or child-skills components, making it difficultto isolate the effects of teacher training alone. The focus of this reportis on the effects of an abbreviated form of Webster-Stratton's (2003)Incredible Years (IY) Teacher Training coupled with motivationalenhancement (Biglan, 2008) and individualized teacher consultationas an intervention package to enhance children's competence andreduce children's behavior problems.

The second issue concerns the range of effects of this briefer,adapted form of IY teacher training. The degree to which brief IYtraining has sufficient potency to effect change for a full range ofpreschool children, from those who display normative social and self-regulatory competence to those who display substantial behaviorproblems and skills deficits, is examined. Third, there is a need toidentify the mechanisms and processes by which teacher training hasits effects on children's behavior in order to shape increasinglyefficacious, effective and efficient interventions. This report examinesthe degree to which the effects of teacher training on the behavior ofchildren are mediated directly by changes in teacher behavior andindirectly by changes in the broader peer social ecology.

337J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

Incredible Years teacher training program

Webster-Stratton's IY teacher training focuses on shapingteachers' use of a set of key classroom management skills, such asthe use of positive attention, praise and tangible reinforcement,proactive prevention of problems, coaching, limit setting, and timeout. Consistent with social learning theory, the assumption is thatenhancement of teachers' skills results in improved child behaviorand learning. The IY teacher training program has demonstratedefficacy in reducing child behavior problems and enhancing childsocial skills when accompanied by parent training or child skills-training components. For example, Webster-Stratton, Reid, andHammond (2001) reported a combination of teacher (36 h) andparent training (14 weeks) resulted in significant improvements inchild behavior at both home and school immediately after interven-tion and at one-year follow-up. There were also reliable interventioneffects on parents' and teachers' behavior, but the mediating effects ofchanges in teacher behavior on child adjustment were not tested inthis or later reports (Beauchaine,Webster-Stratton, & Reid, 2005). Thedegree to which changes in child behavior were attributable to theparenting versus the teacher intervention could not be ascertainedgiven the design of this study.

In a more recent randomized trial, Webster-Stratton, Reid, andStoolmiller (2008) reported that a combination of IY teacher training(28 h) and IY child skills training (Dinosaur School; twice weekly for40 min over several months) relative to a control condition resulted insignificant improvements in teacher classroommanagement strategies,increased child social competence and self-regulation, and decreasedchild behavior problems immediately following intervention. Themediating effects of changes in teacher behavior on child adjustmentwere not tested and the degree towhich changes in child behaviorwereattributable to teacher training versus the child skills trainingcomponent could not be ascertained given the study design.

Using a randomized trial design, Raver et al. (2008) examined theefficacy of the IY teacher training (30 h) andweekly classroom coachingand consultation (82 h over 7 months) relative to a control condition.The IY teacher training and consultation package resulted in higherlevels of classroom positive climate, increased teacher sensitivity, andbetter behavior management at the end of the intervention year. Thisstudy clearly documents that IY teacher training combined withcoaching and consultation results in significant change in teachers'behavior. However, the degree to which children's behavior waschanged by this stand-alone teacher training and the range ofintervention effects for children with varying degrees of challengingbehavior was not reported.

Research on Webster-Stratton's IY program supports the utility ofteacher training in addressing child behavior problems, but there is aneed to further develop and assess the efficacy and effectiveness ofteacher training as a first line, stand-alone intervention for conductproblems of young children from a cost–benefit perspective. Teachertraining may be a more cost- and resource-efficient approach toaddressing child problems given the time and effort needed to deliverparent- and child-training interventions. Multi-component IY pro-gramming may require fiscal and personnel resources not readilyavailable in many preschool settings serving at-risk children. The fullIY teacher training is relatively lengthy and delivered in a mannerrequiring substantial out-of-class time for teachers, and extra costs forsubstitute teachers and to support teachers' involvement in training —

even when offered as a stand-alone program. This is a seriousimpediment for resource-scarce programs with limited budgets andsubstantial annual turnover in personnel (Green, Everhart, Gordon, &Gettman, 2006). Many Head Start agencies, for example, have an arrayof program-level mandatory educational and training requirementsspread throughout the year, leaving reduced time for additionalspecialized group training outside of the classroom. Given theseconstraints, the rationale for the abbreviated and adapted version of IY

teacher training program tested in this report was based onaccommodating such constraints by reducing group training timeand using individual classroom consultation as a means to coachteachers in hands-on implementation and extension of the skillsaddressed in group training. Recent data also indicate that briefinterventions with a motivational component may be sufficient tobring about significant change in the behavior of teachers (Reinke,Lewis-Palmer, & Merrell, 2008).

Mediators and moderators of teacher training

One issue in identifying increasingly efficient and precise interven-tions is to do so without diminishing their potency. Reduced potencymay be a particular issue for children who display significant conductproblems early in development. The behavior of these children tends toevoke counter-coercion and rejection by teachers and peers in amannerwhich powerfully sustains and exacerbates those problems (Snyder,2002; Snyder, Patterson, & Reid, 2003).

It is also important to understand the means by which teachertraining has its effects. Most programs assume a teacher-drivenmodelin which changes in child behavior are the direct result of thecoaching, cues and contingencies teachers provide for a child. Littleattention has been paid to the contribution of the peer socialenvironment as a mechanism which may evoke and sustain thechild problem behavior or which may mediate the effects of teachertraining on reductions in child problem behavior. Difficulties in selfregulation, compliance, cooperation, and attention deployment arenot simply problems of an individual child nor solely ameliorated byteachers' efforts. Aggressive, disruptive and defiant behaviors evokeand are evoked by aversive behavior and rejection by peers (Snyder &Brown, 1983; Snyder, Patterson, & Reid, 2003). Peers imitate andreinforce problem behavior as early as preschool (Snyder et al., 2005;Snyder, Horsch, & Childs, 1997). Child behavior is powerfullyinfluenced by peers as well as by instruction and social contingenciesprovided by teachers (Snyder, 2002). A reasonable but untestedhypothesis is that teacher training indirectly reduces behaviorproblems and promotes social and self-regulatory skills of a childinsofar as a teacher alters the behavior of peers toward the child(Stoolmiller, Eddy, & Reid, 2000) in addition to the cues andcontingencies directed to the child by a teacher.

Aims and hypotheses

The first goal of this research was to evaluate the potential short-term efficacy of a brief, adapted version of Webster-Stratton's (2003)IY teacher training in reducing conduct problems and promotingpositive social behavior of at-risk 3 to 5 year-old Head Start children.It was hypothesized that IY teacher training relative to training asusual would result in fewer child behavior problems and increasedchild positive social behavior. The second goal was to compare theefficacy of IY teacher training for children with and without sig-nificant conduct problems. It was hypothesized that children withand without significant behavior and self-regulatory problems wouldboth benefit from IY teacher training, but that the effects would begreater for children with significant problems despite the potentiallyreduced potency of the brief intervention. The third goal was toexamine the social processes mediating the effects of IY teachertraining on child behavior using classroom observations of children'sinteraction with teachers and peers. It was hypothesized that theeffects of IY teacher training would be mediated by reductions inteacher negative behavior and increases in teacher positive behaviortoward all children in the classroom. These changes in teacherbehavior, in turn, were hypothesized to promote more positive andless negative peer interaction which, in turn, would mediate theeffects of teacher behavior on changes in the behavior of specificchildren.

Table 1Number of intensively observed target children in IY teacher training and teacher trainingas usual conditions according to gender and conduct problem group at baseline.

Group

High conduct Low conduct

Gender Problem Problem Total

IY teacher training Boys 24 26 50Girls 24 16 40Total 48 42 90

Training-as-usual Boys 13 12 25Girls 9 12 21Total 22 24 46

Grand total 70 66 136

338 J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

Method

Participants

One hundred thirty-six children (hereafter called “target chil-dren”) and 28 lead and assistant teachers from 14 Head Start class-rooms (each classroom was half-day, serving different sets ofchildren in the morning and afternoon) in five centers were targetsof observation. Each classroom served an average of 15 children, andthe reactions of non-target children (hereafter called “peers”) to thetarget children in each classroom were also observed. All childrenresided in families with incomes below the federal poverty line.Average age of target children was 4.2 years (range = 3.1 to 4.5).Forty-three percent were girls. Parent-identified child ethnicity was42% Anglo American, 33% African American, 14% Latino, 2% NativeAmerican, 7%multiple ethnicity, and 2% not identified. All lead teachershad a B.A. in early childhood education and averaged 4.3 years ofpreschool instructional experience (range = 1–12 years). All assistantteachers had completed or were enrolled in Associate Degree programsin early childhood development, and averaged 1.3 years of instruc-tional experience (range = 0–7 years). Informed consent for partici-pation was obtained from teachers and parents at the beginning of thepreschool year.

Design and procedures

Nine lead and assistant teacher pairs from three Head Start centerswere assigned to an adapted form of the IY teacher training andclassroom consultation, and five lead and assistant teacher pairsfrom two centers were assigned to a condition involving agencytraining as usual (TAU) using “Conscious Discipline” (Bailey, 2001).Teachers within centers were assigned to the same condition. Prior toassignment to training condition, the instructional experience of leadteachers was calculated for each center, and centers were rankordered on this variable. Centers with the two lowest means onteacher experience were randomly assigned to the IY teacher trainingor to training as usual. The same procedure was used for two centerswith the highest means on teacher experience. The remaining centerwas assigned to the IY teacher training condition. All teacherscontinued to receive ongoing standard agency training in instruc-tional strategies and programming congruent with Head Startperformance guidelines.

In the fall after three weeks after the beginning of the preschoolyear, the lead teacher from each classroom nominated three children(including at least one boy and one girl) who displayed “the mostserious conduct problems” in the classroom, and two children(including at least one boy and one girl) “without significant conductproblems;” these nominees were considered “target children” for theremainder of the study, and the remaining non-nominated children(n = 250) as “peers.” Thus, children were nested within classroomsand teachers, and teachers were nested within centers. Full datawere collected on 136 of the 140 nominated target children in the fall(at baseline, prior to training), and on 109 of the 136 children in thespring (post-training). Childrenwho attrited did so because theywerewithdrawn from Head Start. The resulting assignment of boys andgirls with and without conduct problems (referred to as targetchildren) to training condition is shown in Table 1.

Measures

The behavior of teachers, peers and target children were observedand coded during non-instructional periods in the classroom (notoutside play) in the fall (September and October, providing pre-intervention or baseline data) and spring (April and May, providingpost intervention data) of the preschool year. The behavior of eachtarget child and the behavior of teachers and peers toward each target

child were observed for 5 min on each of three occasions in boththe fall and in the spring using the Classroom Interaction Codingsystem (CIC; Snyder, 2006). The CIC is a 7-second interval codingsystem which classifies behavior of teachers, target children, andpeers toward target children into mutually exclusive and collectivelyexhaustive categories. For target child behavior, the categories inhierarchical precedence were: negative social (aggression, disrup-tion), positive social (all other social behaviors), engaged (solitaryplay), and disengaged (none of the above). For peer behavior towardthe target child, the categories in hierarchical precedence were:negative social (verbal and physical aggression), positive social (allother social behaviors including verbal and play), and none. Forteacher behavior toward all children, the categories in hierarchicalprecedence were: negative social (criticism, warnings, and negativefeedback), positive social (praise, recognition, supportive verbal orphysical actions, contingent reinforcement, and neutral verbal) andnone. The occurrence of teacher commands was coded separatelyduring coding intervals either as good (specific “do” statements) orpoor (vague or “don't” statements).

At the endof each5 minute observationoccasion, observers alsomadefour Likert ratings of target child behavior during the coding period(disruptive and aggressive, constructively engagedwithpeers, compliant/followed classroom rules, and deviant talk or play). Observers also madesix Likert ratingsof teacherbehavior (positive/engaging, overly restrictive,used contingent positive feedback, ignored or did not track the child,angry and critical, and consistent in following through on commands),and six Likert ratings of peer behavior toward the target child (seek out/engage, avoid, ignore, verbal or physical aggression, collude in misbeha-vior, and deviant talk or play). The interval coding and Likert data wereused as indicators of constructs of behavior of target children, peers andteachers.

Five observers were trained to between-coder agreement of 75% inthe fall and spring prior to initiating data collection. Observer trainingincluded memorizing the coding system, coding of verbal exemplarsof behavior, and in-class practice coding. Weekly recalibrationmeetings and ongoing training were used to minimize observerdrift. Observers were blind to treatment condition but aware ofoccasions on which coding reliability was assessed. Coder agreementwas assessed on 10% of all observation occasions. Average agreementon target child behavior was 83% in the fall and 81% in the spring, onpeer behavior was 91% in the fall and 92% in the spring, and on teacherbehavior was 82% in the fall and 78% in the spring. Average intra-classcorrelations between observers' Likert ratings were .77 for target childbehavior, .81 for peer behavior, and .74 for teacher behavior.

Constructs for target children's behavior

Two constructs were created using the observed behavior oftarget children in the fall (baseline) and spring (post-training):positive social behavior and negative social behavior. The positivesocial behavior construct was defined by two composite indicators,each averaged across observation occasions: rates per minute of

339J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

positive social behavior and observer ratings of “constructively engagedwith peers.” The negative social behavior construct was defined bytwo indicators, each averaged across observation occasions: rates perminute of negative social behavior, and observer ratings of “disruptive/aggressive behavior.”

Constructs for teachers' behavior toward target children and peers

Because of the low frequencies withwhich teachers were observedto direct behavior explicitly to target children, teacher constructswere exclusively defined by observers' Likert ratings of teachers'behavior toward all children in the classroom. Two constructs weredeveloped for the fall (baseline) and spring (post training): Positivesocial and negative social behavior. Positive social behavior wasdefined by three ratings, averaged across observation occasions: “ispositive and engaging,” “uses positive feedback contingently,” and“gives good commands/effective redirection.”Negative social behaviorwas defined by three ratings, averaged across observation occasions:“is overly restrictive/controlling,” “is angry/critical,” and “ignores/doesnot track child behavior.”

Constructs for peers' behavior toward target children

Two constructs were developed for the behavior of peers towardeach target child in the fall (baseline) and in the spring (post-training): positive social behavior and negative social behavior.Positive social behavior was defined by two composite indicators,each averaged across observation occasions: the rate per minute ofpeer positive behavior toward the target child and observer ratings of“how much peers seek out and engage the target child.” Negativesocial behavior was defined by three composite indicators, eachaveraged across observation occasions: the rate per minute of peernegative behavior toward the target child, and observer ratings ofpeers' “dislike and avoidance” and “ignoring” of the target child.

Adapted IY teacher training

The adapted IY teacher training entailed three componentsdelivered by two experienced doctoral psychologists with exten-sive experience in teacher consultation and who had both receivedformal multi-day training and were certified in the Incredible Yearsparenting program. The first component consisted of five grouptraining sessions provided from August through October of thepreschool year, derived from Webster-Stratton's IY (2003) teachertraining program. Each training session was 3 h in duration, andfocused on shaping specific classroom behavior management skillsusing a brief didactic presentation followed by discussion, modelingand role play practice with feedback. Classroom application assign-ments were provided after completion of each skill set and reviewedin the next training session. The management skills were: (1) PositiveInvolvement: listening and verbal engagement; tracking good behav-ior, proactive contingent attention; and positive home notes;(2) Proactive Teaching: setting classroom rules and routines; redirec-tion; coaching child behavior; tracking child behavior; and effectivecommands; (3) Positive Reinforcement: specific descriptive praise;distal narrative attention; nonverbal encouragement and physicalwarmth; and reinforcement of compliance; (4) Positive BehaviorSupport Step 1: functional analysis of problem behavior; specifyingproblem behavior and functional alternative behaviors; workingwith parents to address problem behavior; and (5) Positive BehaviorSupport Step 2: devising a classroom intervention plan for a child usingpositive reinforcement; specifying concrete teacher strategies includ-ing coaching children; and involving parents in the behavior planusing daily school behavior cards.

Pre-specified training materials, outlines and procedures, andpost-training check sheets of coverage of materials and adherence to

procedures were used to promote implementation fidelity. The fiveskills were selected for this adaptation of the IY teacher training basedon the authors' judgment of their centrality in creating a classroomenvironment which fosters children's social and self-regulatory skillsand discourages problem behavior. The degree to which teachersimplemented these skills was directly assessed using classroomobservations of teacher behavior, and these observations were usedas central dependent variables in the design (see Table 2).

Given the time constraints on group training, an Acceptance andCommitment (ACT) framework (Biglan, 2008; Biglan, Hayes, &Pistorello, 2008) was used as a second component during grouptraining to enhance teachers' involvement in the acquisition andclassroom implementation of skills in lieu of the motivationcomponents of IY teacher training (e.g., identifying barriers andbenefits, self-reflection inventories, and coping self-statements). TheACT framework included: (1) identifying values as a teacher (how Iwant to be remembered, why I am doing this), and declaring valuesand behavioral intentions publically; (2) centering and creatingmindfulness — awareness of current thoughts and feelings, engage-ment in training activities and in classroom application consistentwith self-identified values, commitment to learning and skill im-provement; and (3) identifying experiential avoidance, creatingawareness and acceptance of negative thoughts and feelings inwork situations, and focusing on constructive teaching actionsconsistent with self-identified values. This ACT component wasimplemented by brief exercises at the beginning and end of eachtraining session, and reiterated during classroom consultation andcoaching. The rationale for this component is based on researchindicating that teachers' use of classroom management skills tends todiminish over the school year (Raver et al., 2008), and often reflect afailure in the intentional and consistent implementation of skills inthe face of ongoing and cumulating classroom challenges rather thanskills deficits.

The third component involved on-site classroom consultation,provided on three occasions per classroom during fall, after trainingsessions 1, 3, and 5. These consultations were about 45 min in length,and focused on implementation of skills targeted in training, includingmethods to self-cue daily implementation, observation and feedbackon skill application, and discussion of behavior plans for specificchildren. These consultations were informed by teachers' self-selectedgoals for skill development, following a Classroom Checkup model(Reinke et al., 2008). In this model, teachers indicate the skill appli-cations for which they would like consultation and coaching in contrastto a one-size-fits-all approach.

Twenty-one staff members (teachers, assistant teachers, andcenter directors) were invited to attend group training. Averageattendance was 87%, ranging from a low of 71% for session 1 (due inpart to unfilled positions) to 100% for session 5. Post-training sessionchecklists indicated successful delivery of each of the five skillscomponents targeted in training. Teachers' average satisfaction ratingsof trainingwere 3.5 on a 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent) Likert scale, and rangedfrom 3.3 for modeling/role playing activities to 3.6 for overall quality ofinstruction.

Results

Analytic strategy

After examining distributional properties of the variables andcompleting basic descriptive statistics, separate analyses were used toaddress each of the three hypotheses. To address the first hypothesis,a series of 2 (training condition) × 2 (time) ANOVAswere used to testwhether the observed behavior of target children, peers and teacherschanged as a result of IY teacher training relative to TAU. To test thesecond hypothesis, a series of 2 (high versus low conduct prob-lems) × 2 (time) ANOVAs were used to test the degree to which IY

Table 2Means (standard deviations) for teacher, peer and target child behavior at baseline and post-intervention for IY teacher training and training as usual (TAU).

IY TAU Intervention × Time

Behavior Baseline Post Baseline Post F p eta2a

Teacher positive behaviorGood commands 3.4 (.73) 3.7 (.81) 3.3 (.75) 3.4 (.88) 0.39 n.s.Contingent positive 3.4 (.99) 3.9 (.66) 3.4 (.70) 3.5 (.84) 3.19 b.10 .04Positive/engaging 3.6 (.79) 3.9 (.57) 3.7 (.63) 3.4 (.77) 5.96 b.05 .06

Teacher negative behaviorIgnore/not track 2.2 (.99) 2.0 (.99) 2.3 (.69) 2.5 (.57) 0.36 n.s.Angry/critical 1.8 (.86) 1.5 (.71) 1.6 (.56) 1.8 (.63) 3.98 b.05 .05Strict/controlling 1.3 (.61) 1.2 (.41) 1.3 (.30) 1.6 (.52) 13.27 b.001 .14

Peer positive behaviorSeek out/like TC 2.8 (.83) 3.0 (1.0) 2.8 (.72) 2.7 (.97) 1.53 n.s.Positive to TC .31 (.35) .33 (.40) .33 (.42) .32 (.45) 2.01 n.s.

Peer negative behaviorNegative to TC .13 (.17) .09 (.20) .12 (.19) .14 (.22) 2.83 b.10 .03Dislike/avoid TC 1.6 (.70) 1.4 (.64) 1.5 (.64) 1.8 (.78) 5.54 b.10 .06Ignore TC 1.9 (.95) 1.3 (.66) 1.8 (.74) 2.3 (1.2) 19.08 b.001 .16

Target child positive behaviorPositive social .28 (.18) .40 (.25) .25 (.16) .24 (.18) 2.97 b.10 .03Constructive engage 2.8 (.73) 4.2 (.74) 2.9 (.73) 3.5 (.85) 3.09 b.10 .03

Target child negative behaviorNegative social .08 (.08) .06 (.07) .05 (.05) .09 (.12) 10.51 b.01 .09Disrupt/aggressive 1.6 (.72) 1.7 (.78) 1.9 (.66) 1.8 (.80) 1.23 n.s.

Note. df for all ANOVA analyses = 1, 107.a Partial Eta squared.

340 J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

teacher training resulted in different amounts of change in thebehavior of children nominated as high or as low on conductproblems, and in the behavior of peers toward those two groups ofchildren. Specific effects for children high and low on conductproblems in the IY teacher training condition were probed usingrepeated measures ANOVAs to assess change from baseline to post-intervention separately for high and for low conduct problemchildren. These analyses were repeated for children high and low onconduct problems in the TAU condition. To test the third hypothesis,mediator models of IY training were tested separately for targetchildren's positive and negative behavior in SEM. These models weretested applying AMOS 4.0 software (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999) usingthe full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation method.FIML does not delete cases missing from one or more waves of datacollection, nor does it delete cases missing within a wave of datacollection. This avoids potential problems such as biased parameterestimates likely to occur if pair-wise or list-wise deletion proceduresare used to compensate for missing data (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999;Wothke, 2000).

Preliminary analyses

Because the goal was to assess the effects of teacher training at theindividual child level, clustering of children within classrooms andteachers may lead to the problem of non-independence and potentialbias of statistical tests that do not formally account for such clusteringusing multilevel, hierarchical models. Because of the relatively smallnumber of classrooms and teachers in this study, such multilevelmodels could not be used; rather, potential biasing due to clusteringeffects were assessed using intra-class correlations (ratio of variancedue to classrooms to total variance; Murray, 1998) for the peer andtarget child outcomes examined in this study. All intra-class correlationswere non-significant, which indicates clustering hadminimal effects onoutcomes.

The average T-score for externalizing behavior problems on theTeacher Report Form (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1986) of children

nominated by teachers in the fall as high on conduct problems was64.9 (range = 58.7 to 71.9) and for children low on conduct problemswas 51.2 (range = b50 to 57.3). There were no significant differencesbetween the T-scores for children nominated as high or betweenthose nominated as low on conduct problems according to trainingcondition. Spring teacher reports of externalizing problems were notcollected to reduce teacher burden.

Effects of IY teacher training

Means and standard deviations for teacher, peer and target childbehavior at baseline (BL, fall) and post conditions (post, spring) arepresented in Table 2 for the IY teacher training and the TAU groups.There were no significant differences between training conditions onany measures at baseline (not shown). Table 2 also provides the Fratios for the key Training Condition X Time interaction, derived froma series of 2 (training condition) × 2 (time) ANOVAs. There were in-creases in observed positive behavior by teachers and target children inthe IY teacher training condition from BL to Post, but little change inpositive behavior of teachers and target children in the TAU condition.Training Condition × Time interaction effects for positive behaviorwere often marginally significant and small in size.

There were decreases in negative behavior of teachers, peers andtarget children in the IY teacher training condition from BL to Post, andincreases in negative behavior of teachers, peers and target children intheTAUcondition. TheTrainingCondition × Time interactioneffects fornegative behavior were more uniformly significant and larger in size. Itshould be noted the effect size estimates are based on discrete behaviorcategories rather than on more complete composites of positive andnegative behavior change. Two significant main effects for trainingcondition were found in these Training Condition × Time ANOVAs:Teachers were more restrictive and controlling toward children in TAUthan IY teacher training condition (p b .05) and children engaged inmore positive behavior (p b .05) in the IY than in the TAU condition. Nosignificant main effects were found for time.

341J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

Effects of IY training for target children high or low on conduct problems

Effects on behavior of target childrenThedifferential effects of IY teacher trainingon thebehavior of target

children high or low on conduct problemswere assessed by a series of 2(high and low conduct problem groups) × 2 (time) ANOVAs. Therewere no significant child Group × Time interactions for change inpositive social behavior and constructive engagement in the IY trainingcondition. The interaction terms for change in disruptive/aggressivebehavior (F1, 64 = 10.12, p = .002) and in the rate of negative socialbehavior (F1, 64 = 5.77, p = .022)were significant for children in the IYteacher training condition. These significant interaction effects wereprobed by one way ANOVAs assessing baseline to post-interventionchange in the behavior separately for high and for low conduct problemchildren in the IY teacher training condition (see top portion of Table 3).The benefits of IY teacher training on the rate of negative socialbehavior (p b .01) and disruptive/aggressive behavior (p b .17) wereonly apparent for target children in the high conduct problem group.Three significant main effects for the IY teacher training conditionwere found in the conduct problem Group × Time ANOVAs. There wasan increase over time (p b .05) in constructive engagement by targetchildren regardless of level of conduct problems, and target children inthe high conduct problem group displayed more disruptive/aggressivebehavior and higher rates of negative social behavior (both p b .001)than children in the low conduct problem group.

Although not central to the hypothesis, a similar series of analyseswere conducted for the behavior of children in the TAU condition. Theonly significant Time × Conduct problem group effect in the TAU con-ditionwas for disruptive/aggressive behavior (F1, 40 = 4.11, p b .05). Asshown in the bottom of Table 3, target children in the TAU conditionwho were nominated by teachers as low on conduct problems in thefall of the year were observed to show increased levels of disruptive/aggressive behavior from baseline to post training. There was also onegroup main effect (p b .05) for children in the TAU condition; childrenhigh on conduct problems were rated as engaging in more disruptive/aggressive behavior than children low on conduct problems.

Effects on peers' behavior toward target childrenThe differential effects of IY teacher training on peers' behavior

toward target children high and low on conduct problems wereassessed by a series of 2 (high and low conduct problem groups) × 2(time) ANOVAs. There were no significant target child Group × Timeinteractions for peers' positive social behavior, seeking out/liking, andignoring target children. The interaction terms for peers' rate ofaggressive behavior (F1, 64 = 5.85, p = .019) and for disliking/avoidingtarget children (F1, 64 = 3.92, p = .047) were significant. These inter-

Table 3Baseline (BL) to post intervention changes in the behavior of high and low conductproblem target children in the IY teacher training and training as usual (TAU) conditions.

Target child behavior

IY— high conduct problem IY — low conduct problems

Mean SD F p Mean SD F p

Negative soc BL .14 .09 .03 .04Post .06 .06 9.22 .01 .05 .05 0.78 .48

Disrupt/agg BL 2.01 .71 1.46 .40Post 1.76 .87 1.98 .17 1.65 .77 0.24 .63

TAU — high conductproblem

TAU — low conduct problems

Mean SD F p Mean SD F p

Disrupt/agg BL 2.29 .65 1.38 .33Post 1.93 .82 1.78 .20 1.73 .65 11.73 b.001

Note. df for all ANOVA analyses for the IY teacher training group = 1, 65; and for theTAU group = 1, 40.

action effects were probed by one way ANOVAs assessing baseline topost-training change for peer behavior toward target children sepa-rately for high and low conduct problem groups (see Table 4). As shownon the left of Table 4, IY teacher training reduced peers' negativesocial behavior, dislike/avoidance and ignoring of target children highon conduct problems. IY teacher training reduced peers' ignoring oftarget children low on conduct problems. One significant main timeeffect in the Group × Time ANOVAs for peers' behavior toward targetchildren was found in the IY condition; peer ignoring decreased overtime (p b .05) regardless of conduct problem group.

Although not central to the hypothesis, a similar series of analyseswere conducted for peers' behavior toward target children in the TAUcondition. No significant main effects or Group × Time interactioneffects were found.

Mediator models

In order to test the social processes by which IY teacher trainingimpacts target child behavior, two SEMmodels were tested. IY teachertraining effects were assessed for teacher behavior, and for theindirect effects of peer behavior as a mediator of teacher behavior onchange in target behavior using separate models for target childpositive (Fig. 1) and negative behavior (Fig. 2). In both models, themean z-scores of observed rates and observational ratings (seeTable 2) were used (with loadings set at +1.00) to define the teacherand peer positive behavior constructs. In both models, the contribu-tion of themean z-score of observed rates and observational ratings ofnegative behavior (see Table 2) to the constructs was freely estimated,and resulted in significant negative loadings.

Each model was tested in a multi-group SEM format, contrastingthe effects of IY teacher training for target childrenwhowere high andlow on conduct problems in the fall of the preschool year. Because theobserved behavior rates and observer ratings used as indicators todefine constructs for teacher positive and negative social behaviorwere not specific to target children, all paths to teacher constructswere constrained to be equal across high and low conduct problemgroups. There were no significant direct effects of IY teacher trainingon target child positive or negative behavior and these paths weredeleted from the final models (but are shown in Figs. 1 and 2 asdashed lines). This indicates the impact of IY teacher training on targetchild behavior was indirect and double mediated, first through changesin teacher behavior and then through changes in peers' behavior towardtarget children. All paths other than those from intervention status toteacher behaviorwere freely estimated by group and comparisonsweremade between paths for target children high and low conduct problemsin the fall of the year.

Fig. 1 shows the model for effects of IY teacher training on teacherbehavior, the relation of changes in teacher behavior to peers'behavior toward target children, and the effects of changes in peers'behavior on the positive behavior of target children high and lowon conduct problems. The model fit the data adequately. IY teacher

Table 4Baseline (BL) to post intervention changes in the behavior of peers toward targetchildren high and low conduct problem in the IY teacher training conditions (ANOVA).

IY — peer behavior toward

High conduct problemchildren

Low conduct problemchildren

Mean SD F p Mean SD F p

Negative social BL .15 .18 .12 .18Post .09 .16 3.67 .09 .08 .15 0.94 .44

Dislike/avoid BL 1.81 .73 1.39 .63Post 1.38 .74 4.27 .05 1.33 .54 0.19 .76

Ignore BL 1.90 .90 1.87 .98Post 1.20 .53 18.99 b.001 1.34 .76 6.51 .02

Note. df for all ANOVA analyses for the IY teacher training group = 1, 32.

Fig. 1. The effects of IY teacher training on the positive behavior of children high and low on conduct problems as mediated by changes in teacher and peer behavior. Path coefficientsfor low conduct problem children are outside parentheses, for high conduct problem children inside parentheses; significant differences between low and high conduct problemchildren are shown in bold and labeled as Group Difference (GD).

342 J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

training resulted in reliable improvements in teacher behavior(increased positive and decreased negative) at post intervention inthe spring controlling for fall baseline levels of teacher behavior.Changes in teacher behavior, in turn, were related to improvements inpeers' behavior (increased positive and decreased negative) towardtarget children low and high on conduct problems in the fall. Teacherbehavior was more powerfully associated with changes in peers'behavior toward target children who were high on conduct problemsat baseline than toward children low on conduct problems at baseline(p b .05). Improvements in peers' behavior toward target childrenwere related to increases in the positive behavior of target childrenwho were high and low on conduct problems. Fall baseline to springpost-intervention shifts in peers' behavior toward target childrenwas marginally greater toward child high versus those low on con-duct problems. The direct effects of teacher behavior on the positive

behavior of target children were not significant when tested in theabsence of peer behavior as a mediator. The model accounted for 16%of the variance in positive behavior of children low on conductproblems and for 18% of the variance in positive behavior of childrenhigh on conduct problems.

Fig. 2 shows a comparablemodel for the effects of IY teacher trainingon target child negative behavior. The model fit the data adequately. Asexpected, the parameter estimates for the effects of training on teacherbehavior and for the effects of teacher behavior onpeerbehavior towardtarget children were nearly the same as shown in Fig. 1. Improvementsin peer behavior toward target childrenwere related to decreases in thenegative behavior from fall baseline to spring post-intervention fortarget children high and low on conduct problems in the fall of the year.As in themodel forpositive behavior in Fig. 1, thereweregreater shifts inpeer behavior toward target children high versus low on conduct

Fig. 2. The effects of IY teacher training on the negative behavior of children high and low on conduct problems asmediated by changes in teacher and peer behavior. Path coefficientsfor low conduct problem children are outside parentheses, for high conduct problem children inside parentheses; significant differences between low and high conduct problemchildren are shown in bold and labeled as Group Difference (GD).

343J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

problems. Additionally, there was significantly less fall (baseline) tospring (post intervention) temporal continuity (p b .05) in the negativebehavior of target children high on conduct problems than of childrenlow on conduct problems. Direct effects of changes in teacher behavioron the negative behavior of target children were not significant whentested in the absence of the peer behavior mediator. The modelaccounted for 46% of the variance in negative behavior of children lowon conduct problems and 24% of the variance of children high onconduct problems.

Discussion

Observations of teachers' and children's behavior were used toascertainwhether a brief, adapted version of the IY teacher trainingwassufficient to bring about change in teachers' behavior, if IY teacher

training had differential effects on the behavior of target children highand low on conduct problems, and themechanisms bywhich IY teachertraining had its effects on target children's behavior. Brief IY teachertraining relative to a teacher training as usual condition increasedteachers' positive behavior anddecreased teachers' negative behavior asmeasured by observers blind to training condition. This is consistentwith previous research indicating that the skills targeted in IY teachertraining result in changes in teachers' behavior in the classroom(Beauchaine et al., 2005). This report indicates such changes occureven when IY teacher training is provided using an abbreviated format.Teachers receiving IY trainingwere observed to engage in less criticism,less anger and less negative control, and to more frequently usecontingent positive attention and positive engagement during interac-tion with children. In contrast, teachers in the training-as-usualcondition were observed to engage in more criticism, anger and

344 J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

negative control as the school year progressed, consistentwith previousresearch indicating teachersmay become increasingly negative over theschool year in response to continuing challenging child behavior andongoing classroom demands (Raver et al., 2008). Teacher trainingcoupled with a mindfulness and valuing component and classroomconsultation focused on implementation may not only enhance skillsbut also foster continuing implementation of skills over the schoolyear in the face of diminishing energy (Biglan, 2008).

The benefits of brief IY teacher training were also apparent inbaseline to post-intervention changes in child behavior. Childrentargeted for intensive observation who were served by teachersreceiving the adapted IY teacher training displayed increased rates ofpositive behavior and constructive social engagement, and reducedrates of negative behavior toward peers. This replicates previousresearch indicating IY teacher training positively impacts childbehavior in the classroom (Webster-Stratton et al., 2001, 2008) andextends that research by demonstrating beneficial child effects can begenerated by teacher training alone without the addition of parenttraining or child skills training components. In contrast, peer inter-action in the training-as-usual group was characterized by increasedrates of negative behavior, rejection and ignoring from baseline in thefall to post-intervention in the spring of the preschool year. This isconsistent with previous research which indicates that peer aggres-sion in poorly supervised settings without clear adult contingenciesmay actually increase during the school year (Snyder, Schrepferman,Brooker, & Stoolmiller, 2003).

These effects of the adapted IY teacher training with classroomconsultation and a mindfulness and valuing component are promis-ing, but the resulting changes in teacher and child behavior weresometimes marginally reliable and generated relatively small effectsizes. This suggests that the abbreviation and adaptation of standardIY teacher training may come at the cost of reduced potency. How-ever, the reliability of the findings and the small effect sizes may alsoreflect the limited sample size in this study, the prevention orien-tation of the study, relatively low sampling reliability associated withobservation methods, and the use of discrete, micro-social behaviorcategories rather than more global measures of teacher and childbehavior outcomes.

A closely related potency question concerns the relative effects ofbrief IY teacher training on the behavior of children high on conductproblems, and on the quality of peers' interaction with those children.The effects of the IY teacher training in reducing the negative behaviorof children high on conduct problems, and in reducing the negativebehavior, avoidance and rejection of those children by peers arepromising. Similar effects were less apparent for children from the IYteacher training classrooms that were low on conduct problems.Other studies have reported school-based interventions most stronglyimpact the negative behavior of children who are initially mostaggressive (Stoolmiller et al., 2000), including stronger effects of IYinterventions for children who are at high risk (Beauchaine et al.,2005). Although only indirectly inferred, the brief IY teacher trainingmay have also generated a real prevention effect for low risk childrenin this study; children with few conduct problems in the training asusual condition evidenced increasing negative behavior from the fallto spring of the pre-K year.

Previous research has demonstrated that IY teacher traininghas beneficial effects on teacher and child behavior in the classroom,but has not formally tested whether changes in teacher behaviormediate the impact of training on changes in child behavior. The lackof formal tests of mediation may reflect a logical assumption thatchanges in child behavior must result from changes in teacher be-havior because training targets teachers and not children. Even ifthis is the case, at least two social learning processes may be pos-tulated as mediators of teacher training. In one model, the cues,coaching and contingencies which teachers provide for each childmay be responsible for behavior change by that specific child — a

teacher to child direct effect model. A second peer-systemic modelwould postulate that the effects of changes in teacher behavior on aspecific child are mediated by teacher-generated changes in thebroader peer ecology experienced by that child. This secondmodel isconsistent with research documenting the power of peers during thepreschool years (Snyder, 2002).

The structural models in this study support the peer ecologymodel; changes in peer behavior toward target children mediatedthe effect of IY teacher training on the behavior of target children.This meditational effect was found for children who were high andlow on conduct problems, but the effect of changes in teacherbehavior was more powerful for peers' behavior toward childrenhigh on conduct problems. Support for the peer ecology modelsuggests a different avenue for intervention than is often used to helpteachers address the behavior of children with significant conductproblems. In addition to creating child-specific behavior plans inwhich a teacher provides coaching, cues and contingencies to directlymodify the behavior of a problem child, a complementary strategywould focus on creating a general classroom social ecology that altersthe behaviors which peers direct to a problem child during ongoingsocial interaction.

The data described in this report have a number of limitations. First,the nested nature of the design may have violated independenceassumptions for statistical analyses at the level of individual childrenand teachers. A larger sample of classrooms and centers would beneeded to use hierarchical models to address these nesting issues in asophisticated fashion. As such assessment of the efficacy of the abbre-viated, adapted version of IY teacher training and consultation testedin these analyses may be biased. Second, only the short-term, same-year effects of training were assessed, and the concurrent mea-surement of the effects of teacher training on the behavior of teachers,peers and target children weakens a formal and strong assessment ofthe social processes mediating the effects of training.

Reliance on classroom observational data derived from codersblind to intervention status provides substantial advantages. It in-cremented internal validity by minimizing the biasing effects ofknowledge of intervention status. It also provided the opportunity toassess the effects of teacher training on specific teacher and childbehaviors in the classroom at a theory-driven, micro-social level. How-ever, sole reliance on observation and the absence of global teacherratings of child behavior has disadvantages. From a measurementstandpoint, the use of three occasions of observation was barely ade-quate in terms of sampling reliability, and obviated more formalsequential analyses. There was also a lack of converging evidence andsocial validation of changes in teacher and child behavior from theperspective of teachers, children and parents.

The current report examines an abbreviated version of IY teachertraining as part of a multi-component package. The degree to whichclassroom consultation and the mindfulness/valuing componentscontributed to and incremented the efficacy of the five session IYteacher training bears further examination. The potential role ofthese added components to IY teacher training is important becauseresearch indicates teachers' readiness and intention to change may beprerequisite to acquisition of skills during training and to applicationof those skills in the natural environment (Biglan, 2008). In the case ofteacher training, the transfer and implementation of skills targeted intraining to the day-to-day classroom environment may be criticaldeterminants of the efficacy and effectiveness of such training. Theefficacy of the adapted version of the IY teacher training attests to therobustness of the program, and promise for its adaptation tomeet localneeds and time and fiscal constraints in dissemination. The degree towhich in-class teacher consultation can be used to deliver some facetsof the IY teacher training outside of group training is an importantissue given the time and fiscal constraints on extended group teachertraining for many organizations providing preschool education andcare giving.

345J. Snyder et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (2011) 336–345

In summary, brief IY teacher training resulted in observableincreases in teachers' positive behavior and in reductions in teachers'negative behavior in the classroom relative to training as usual. Theeffects of IY teacher training were also apparent in similar changes insocial interactions among children, indicating teachers' behavior wassustained and generalized to the broader classroom social environ-ment. Training-induced changes in the broader peer social ecologyhad beneficial effects on the behavior of children high on conductproblems in the fall of the year. Classroom-wide ecological changes inpeer behavior may be an important mediator of the effects of IYteacher training, and suggest that teacher training may usefullytarget strategies which can be used by teacher to maximize andcapitalize on such peer ecological effects. While the training effects inthis study were small to moderate in size and potentially biased byviolation of independence assumptions, the effects generated by thebrief adapted IY teacher training are encouraging and attractive.Teacher training emphasizing the acquisition and classroomapplicationof core behavior management skills combined with mindfulness/valuing and brief classroom-based assistance in implementing skillsand in developing behavior management tactics to address the needs ofchallenging childrenmay approximate an optimalmix of ingredients toeffect change in a cost- and resource-efficient manner.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from Wichita StateUniversity and from Child Start, Inc. We thank all of the teachers,children and parents who supported this research.

References

Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. (1986). Manual for the teacher's report form and teacherversion of the child behavior profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department ofPsychiatry.

Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters.Bailey, B. A. (2001). Conscious discipline. Orlando, Florida: Loving Guidance.Beauchaine, T. P., Webster-Stratton, C., & Reid, M. J. (2005). Mediators, moderators, and

predictors of 1-year outcomes among children treated for early-onset conduct problems:A latent growth curve analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 371–388.

Biglan, A. (2008). Teacher stress and collegiality: Overlooked factors in the effort topromote evidence-based practices. ABA Newsletter, 31(3).

Biglan, A., Hayes, S. C., & Pistorello, J. (2008). Acceptance and commitment: Implicationsfor prevention science. Prevention Science, 9, 139–151.

Green, B. L., Everhart, M., Gordon, L., & Gettman, M. G. (2006). Characteristics of effectivemental health consultation inearly childhood settings. Topics in Early ChildhoodSpecialEducation, 26, 142–152.

Joseph, G., & Strain, P. (2003). Comprehensive evidence-based social–emotional curriculafor young children: An analysis of efficacious adoption potential. Topics in EarlyChildhood Education, 23, 65–76.

Murray, D. M. (1998). The design and analysis of group randomized trials. New York, NY:Oxford University Press.

President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (2003). Achieving the promise:Transforming mental health care in America. Final report (DHHS PublicationNo. SMA-03-3832). Rockville, Maryland: Author.

Raver, C. C., Jones, S. M., Li-Grining, C. P., Metzger, M., Champion, K. A., & Sardin, L.(2008). Improving preschool classroom processes: Preliminary findings from arandomized trial implemented in Head Start settings. Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly, 23, 10–26.

Reinke,W.M., Lewis-Palmer, T., &Merrell, K. (2008). Theclassroomcheck-up:Aclassroom-wide teacher consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptivebehavior. School Psychology Review, 37, 315–332.

Rimm-Kaufman, S., Pianta, R., & Cox, S. (2000). Teacher's judgments of problems in thetransition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 491–511.

Snyder, J. (2002). Reinforcement and coercion mechanisms in the development ofantisocial behavior: Peer relationships. In J. B. Reid, G. R. Patterson, & J. Snyder(Eds.), Antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: A developmental analysis andmodel for intervention (pp. 101–122). Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation.

Snyder, J. (2006). Classroom interaction code manual. Wichita, Kansas: Wichita StateUniversity.

Snyder, J., & Brown, K. (1983). Oppositional behavior and noncompliance in preschoolchildren: Environmental correlates and skills deficits. Behavioral Assessment, 5, 331–347.

Snyder, J., Horsch, E., & Childs, J. (1997). Peer relationships of young children: Affiliativechoices and the shaping of aggressive behavior. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 26,145–156.

Snyder, J., Patterson, G. R., & Reid, J. B. (2003). A social learning model of child andadolescent antisocial behavior. In B. B. Lahey, T. Moffitt, & A. Caspi (Eds.), The causesof conduct disorder and serious delinquency (pp. 27–48). New York, NY: Guilford.

Snyder, J., Schrepferman, L., Brooker, M., & Stoolmiller, M. (2003). Observed peervictimization during early elementary school: Continuity, growth, and relation torisk for child antisocial and depressive behavior, Child Development, 74, 1881–1898.

Snyder, J., Schrepferman, L., Oeser, J., Patterson, G. R., Stoolmiller, M., Johnson, K., &Snyder, A. (2005). Peer deviancy training and affiliation with deviant peers inchildren: Occurrence and contribution to early onset conduct problems. Develop-ment and Psychopathology, 17, 397–413.

Stoolmiller, M., Eddy, J. M., & Reid, J. B. (2000). Detecting and describing preventativeintervention effects in a universal school-based randomized trial targeting delinquentand violent behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 296–306.

Walker, H. M., Kavanagh, K., Stiller, B., Golly, A., Severson, H. H., & Feil, E. G. (1998). Firststep to success: An early intervention approach to preventing school antisocialbehavior. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 6, 66–80.

Webster-Stratton, C. (2003). The Incredible Years: Teacher Training Program. www.incredibleyears.com.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, M. J., & Hammond, M. (2001). Preventing conduct problems,promoting social competence: A parent and teacher training partnership in HeadStart. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 288–302.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, M. J., & Hammond, M. (2004). Treating children with early-onset conduct problems: Intervention outcomes for parent, child, and teachertraining. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 105–124.

Webster-Stratton, C., Reid, J. M., & Stoolmiller, M. (2008). Preventing conduct problemsand improving school readiness: Evaluation of the Incredible Years Teacher andChild Training Programs in high-risk schools. Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry, 49, 471–488.

Wothke, W. (2000). Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data. In T. D.Little, K. U. Shnabel, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Modeling longitudinal and multi-level data:Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (pp. 219–240). Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum.