University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Examining approaches to implementing Responsive Classroom within international schools

(USC Thesis Other)

Examining approaches to implementing Responsive Classroom within international schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Examining Approaches to Implementing Responsive Classroom Within International Schools

by

Sarah Anne Farris

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August 2018

Copyright 2018 Sarah Anne Farris

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

ii
Acknowledgements
“I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both hands; you
need to be able to throw something back.” - Maya Angelou

This dissertation would not have been possible without a lot of help from a lot of people.
I love to help others, but I am not so good about asking for help from others. This quote is a
reminder that, in life, it is important to extend a helping hand, and a reminder to ask for and
accept a helping hand when it is extended. Here’s to all of the helping hands that were offered,
and that I clung to, along the way to becoming Dr. Farris.

To my dissertation chair, Dr. Ruth Chung, and dissertation committee members, Dr. Larry
Picus, and Dr. Alan Green: When I started this journey, I had no idea what my dissertation topic
would be and had no idea I was even capable of actually writing five chapters. Thank you for
challenging me, asking tough questions, and giving me confidence. You are all dedicated
educators and I am so grateful for your calm supportive guidance.

To my amazing family: Mom, remember helping me complete the USC application while in
Paris? Remember editing my first three chapters throughout Florida, New England, and Canada?
I do. And I love you. Dad, Sally, Evan, Joel, and Annie...thank you for loving me, making me
laugh, saying lots of prayers for focus and attention, and unrelenting support. I certainly fell into
the right nest! I am blessed beyond belief to be in this family.

To Ali Cuthbert, the Frog to my Toad: Oh my goodness, where to begin? You have provided so
many laughs, talked me off the ledge, pushed me to reach deadlines, and made sure I kept
balance in my life these past three years. My dissertation has been powered by truffle fries, sour
gummy worms, and lots of bubbles because of you. The fact that you spent eight hours with me
to get through the final push means we are officially best friends for ever. Forever. Mad love.

To Noelle Ostrowski, future jam seller: Girl, you have supported me through so many ups and
downs. Even though we are geographically apart, you supported me daily through our many
tunnel visits. You have said prayers and you have both encouraged and challenged me to meet
those many deadlines. I love you to pieces...4 Evah family.

To Betsy Hall, the introvert to my ambivert: Remember when you tried to ditch me? It didn’t
work because you are one of my favourite people and closest friends. How fun that we could go
through this doctorate together, albeit at different paces. Thank you for making me laugh, for
keeping me calm, for being okay when I go in for the awkward hug, and for truffle fries.

To Colleen Steigerwald, my spin obsessed partner in crime: You made sure to keep me balanced
throughout these three years. We have spent so many hours riding back and forth on the MRT,
finding the perfect bike, analyzing our rides, and solving the world’s problems. You’re a gem.

To my friends, loyal cheerleaders: A huge thank you to all of my friends. You know who you
are, and I love you. Thank you for being patient with me and understanding when I turned down

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

iii
invitations to go out. You didn’t cross me off the list, but instead you checked in on me and
cheered me on.

To the Counseling Crew, doing the good work: This team. Such good people. I have learned so
much from all of you. Thank you for pushing Responsive Classroom forward.

To the team at Anthem, my therapists: A huge thank you to Mel, Alex and Hann Sern. You may
not be aware, but you have served as my therapists for the past three years. What started out as a
way to procrastinate soon turned into a much-needed outlet to maintain sanity. Anthem not only
served as my therapist's’ office, but as a welcoming community when I was overwhelmed.

To Ken Schunk, my mentor: You. Thank you for believing in the importance of social emotional
learning. Thank you for believing in connections. Thank you for believing in me. I have learned
so much.

To David Hoss, my believer: Remember when you took a chance on me 13 years ago? I do. You
are the reason why I have had the opportunity to work in the best international school in the
world. I can’t thank you enough for seeing the potential in me all those years ago.

To Dr. Chip Kimball, brave and generous leader: Thank you for giving all of us this
opportunity. You are a dedicated and innovative leader. It has been so amazing to watch you
navigate the ups and downs of change management with reflection, humility, fearlessness, heart
and faith. I would not be Dr. Farris without you.

To Rudy and Ramona, furry doctoral students: These two. My little furry companions have
walked across my laptop, curled up on my research articles, and given me loyal affection when I
typed blurry-eyed at all hours of the night.

To the SAS USC cohort: There is no way I would have completed this doctorate without these
people. We have had difficult conversations, we have challenged each other’s thinking, we have
laughed, we have vented, we have cheered each other on, and we have shed a few tears. Thank
you, Robin Pearson, Martha Began, Dennis Steigerwald, Lauren Bokaer, Lauren Murphy, Treena
Casey, Amanda Wood, Cris Ewell, Susan Shaw, Monica San-Jose, Marianne Yong-McDonald,
Scott Oskins and Betsy Hall. A special thank you to Jennifer Sparrow for being our fearless and
patient leader. A special thank you to Lisa Wan and Anne (Annie Bananie) Wenstrom for being
simply awesome...Starbucks, laughs, advice, car rides, and friendship.

To the educators at MAS and LACES, my inspiration: What a treat to meet these educators!
Thank you for welcoming me, inspiring me, and being passionate about student’s social
emotional well-being. You do great work each and every day.

To my favourite Responsive Classroom Consultant: You are my idol! I wish I could bottle up all
of your knowledge and use it for my own. I always leave you with good nuggets of inspiration.
Thank you for supporting TAS in their implementation journey. Thank you for supporting me!

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

iv
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... ii

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vi

Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... vii

Chapter One: Overview of the Study ............................................................................................. 1

Introduction to the Problem ....................................................................................................... 1

Global student well-being. ...................................................................................................... 2

SEL as a preventative measure. .............................................................................................. 3

Benefits of SEL. ...................................................................................................................... 3

Organizational Context .............................................................................................................. 5

Temasek American School. ..................................................................................................... 5

2020 Strategic Plan: The Five Priorities. ................................................................................. 6

Organizational goal. ............................................................................................................... 6

The Responsive Classroom Approach ......................................................................................... 7

Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................................. 7

Importance of the Study ............................................................................................................. 8

Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 10

Definition of Terms .................................................................................................................. 12

Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................................. 14

Positive Psychology .................................................................................................................. 14

Positive Education .................................................................................................................... 16

Social and Emotional Learning ................................................................................................ 24

Definition of social and emotional learning. .......................................................................... 25

Collaboration for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning ................................................... 26

The Responsive Classroom Approach ....................................................................................... 29

Characteristics of the responsive classroom approach. .......................................................... 29

Implementation ........................................................................................................................ 37

Implementation readiness. .................................................................................................... 37

Initial training and ongoing professional development. ......................................................... 39

Summary ................................................................................................................................. 41

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................ 43

Chapter Three: Methodology ....................................................................................................... 45

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

v
Rationale for Method of Study ................................................................................................. 45

Participants and Sampling Procedure ...................................................................................... 46

Instrumentation ....................................................................................................................... 48

Credibility and Trustworthiness of Data .................................................................................. 52

Chapter Four: Results ................................................................................................................. 56

Participants ............................................................................................................................. 56

Themes .................................................................................................................................... 57

Findings Related to Research Question 1: Promising Practices ................................................ 58

Administration Involvement ..................................................................................................... 61

Training. .............................................................................................................................. 62

Keeping it alive. .................................................................................................................... 64

Findings Related to Research Question 2: Barriers .................................................................. 67

Schedule. .............................................................................................................................. 68

Findings Related to Research Question 3: Lessons ................................................................... 70

Transient populations .............................................................................................................. 71

Personalization ........................................................................................................................ 72

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 73

Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................. 77

Summary of Findings ............................................................................................................... 78

Implications for Practice .......................................................................................................... 84

Communication and short-term wins. ................................................................................... 84

Perceived principal buy-in. ................................................................................................... 85

Creating supporting structures. ............................................................................................ 86

Define non-negotiables. ......................................................................................................... 86

Grow internal capacity. ........................................................................................................ 87

Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................... 87

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 88

References ................................................................................................................................... 90

Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 103

Appendix A: Informed Consent Information Sheet for Research ........................................... 103

Appendix B: Interview Guide: Mumbai American School and London American Community
Elementary School ................................................................................................................. 105

Appendix C: Interview Guide: Temasek American School ..................................................... 108

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

vi
Appendix D: Interview Guide: Responsive Classroom Consultant ......................................... 111

Appendix E: Focus Group Guide: Mumbai American School ................................................ 114

List of Tables
Table 3.1 Interview and Focus Group Participants……………………………………………...48
Table 4.1 Overview of Participants……………………………………………………………...57

List of Figures
Figure 1. Temasek American School social emotional learning program………………………43

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

vii
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the implementation of Responsive Classroom
(RC) in an international school setting so that Temasek American School (TAS) can successfully
implement RC within the elementary school. This study looked at two comparable international
schools and their journey to RC implementation. The following research questions were used to
guide this study: What are some promising practices these two international schools have used to
develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, understanding of the four domains, and use of
the key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity? What are some barriers experienced by
these two international schools when implementing RC? What lessons does the elementary
division at TAS need to learn from these two international schools in order to implement RC
with fidelity? In order to answer these questions, this qualitative study analyzed data from
interviews with administrators from international schools, a consultant from Responsive
Classroom and a focus group of elementary international school educators. Findings from this
study revealed several promising practices and barriers. The promising practices included shared
philosophy, perceived principal buy-in, removal of organizational barriers, providing initial and
ongoing training, creating supporting structures to keep RC alive, and the importance of
personalizing RC to reflect each school’s unique culture and setting. The barriers were schedule,
use of common teacher language, and working with a transient population. Through this study,
TAS and other international schools can learn lessons from the data provided in order to
successfully implement a social emotional learning (SEL) framework within their setting.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

1
Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Introduction to the Problem
There is a growing recognition that today’s schools need to address the social and
emotional development of their students in order to ensure successful student performance (The
Collaboration for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), 2013; Denham &
Weissberg, 2004; National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2009; NAESP
Foundation Task Force on Early Learning, 2011; National Research Council, 2012; National
School Readiness Indicators Initiative, 2005). Today’s students live in an uncertain world
punctuated by global warming, terrorism, political instability, a widening divide between the
wealthy and poor, globalization, and other social issues. These students also are immersed in
pervasive social media, compete on a global scale for university acceptance, and many lead
overscheduled lives. This pressure can manifest itself in various ways. According to the Child
Mind Institute’s 2016 Children’s Mental Health Report, 17.1 million young people have or have
had a diagnosable psychiatric disorder. This equates to one out of every five children. Anxiety
disorders are the most common, followed closely by behavior and mood disorders (Merikangas
et al., 2010). Fifty years ago, the onset for depression was age 30, but now the average onset is
age 15 (Seligman, 2008).
What can schools do to support students and promote well-being? Students, ages 6- to
17-years-old who live in the United States typically spend 30 to 35 hours per week in school
(Hofferth & Sandberg, 2000; Seligman, Ernst, Gillham, Reivich, & Linkins, 2009). Given that
students spend most of their waking time in school, it makes sense that well-being should be
taught in schools through explicit social and emotional learning (SEL). SEL approaches such as
Responsive Classroom, PATHS, Positive Action, Ruler, and Tribes Learning Communities are

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

2
evidence-based approaches used by several schools. Promoting SEL in schools is important for
the following reasons: student well-being on a global scale is gaining recognition and
importance; SEL is a preventive measure to combat mental disorders and support key character
skills needed in the 21st century; and finally, research supports the positive benefits of SEL.
Global student well-being.
The Programme for International School Assessment (PISA) conducts annual surveys of
how countries around the world perform in reading, math, and science. In 2015, PISA expanded
this to include student well-being, which was measured by satisfaction with their lives and
relationships with peers, teachers and parents, as well as how time is spent outside of school. In
the recent 2016 report involving 72 countries and 540,000 students, results revealed the global
scale of anxiety and bullying. On average, 66% of students feel stressed about poor grades; 59%
of students worry that taking a test will be difficult; 55% report they are anxious about taking a
test, even if they are well-prepared; and 4% of students (equating to one student per class) report
being bullied (OECD PISA Report, 2016). The report showed the importance of teachers and the
role they play in creating environments that lead to well-being. Happier students report positive
relationships with their teachers (OECD PISA Report, 2016).
Within the United States, all 50 states have incorporated social and emotional learning
(SEL) into their preschool standards (CASEL, 2017). Illinois has adopted state-wide SEL
standards, while Kansas has implemented Social, Emotional, and Character Development
standards (Gordon, Ji, Mulhall, Shaw, & Weissberg, 2011). In 2015, then President Obama
signed into law the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which supports SEL (CASEL, 2017).
Outside of the United States, SEL is growing in both recognition and use. Australia and its
Geelong Grammar School are pioneers in the field of positive education. In 2005, Singapore’s

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

3
Ministry of Education introduced the SEL Framework to support the holistic growth of
Singapore’s students (Ministry of Education Singapore, 2016).
SEL as a preventative measure.
Given the rise in anxiety and depression among youths, it is critical to move from a
model of reaction to one of prevention. Recognizing and understanding that social and
emotional development is of equal importance to academic development is a first step in
prevention. Research has found that “emotions can facilitate or impede children’s academic
engagement, work ethic, commitment, and ultimate school success” (Durlak, Weissberg,
Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011, p. 405). Research has shown that SEL, and the mastery
of social and emotional competencies, can enhance children’s success in life and are associated
with greater well-being (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011; Elias, Zins, & Weissberg, 1997; Zins
& Elias, 2007). In an effort to boost well-being and promote student mental health, both the
Child Mind Institute and PISA recommend strengthening student/teacher relationships,
supporting and training teachers to build on student’s strengths, and creating inclusive
classrooms communities (Child Mind Institute, 2016; OECD PISA Report, 2016).
Benefits of SEL.
Research supporting the benefits of SEL has grown over the years and has more and
more frequently found that SEL is linked to increases in academic achievement, improved
attitudes about school, and decreases in aggression and mental health problems (CASEL, 2013;
Greenberg et al., 2003; Zins, 2004). A meta-analysis of 213 studies involving more than 270,000
students showed the positive effect of SEL curricula in schools (Durlak et al., 2011). Students in
SEL programs showed: a 22% improvement in SEL skills, a 10% increase in “positive social
behaviors,” a 10% decrease in “emotional distress,” and an 11% improvement in academic

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

4
performance (Durlak et al., 2011). According to the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and
Emotional Learning (CASEL), acquiring SEL competencies and skills is important in early life
as well as when children socialize with peers and adults outside of their homes (CASEL, 2013).
Social and emotional learning have been identified as a possible solution to promoting
student well-being. With the advent of positive education, there has been a growing movement
to utilize SEL within schools by graduate students who are not only academically proficient in
core subjects, but also proficient in collaboration, communication, and healthy social and
emotional skills. Given that children spend the vast majority of their waking time at school
(Hofferth & Sandberg, 2000; Seligman et al., 2009), schools have an “important role to play in
raising healthy children by fostering not only their cognitive development, but also their social
and emotional development” (Durlak et al., 2011). Schools, already spread thin by competing
demands and time constraints, must prioritize and effectively implement evidence-based SEL
approaches to ensure student success (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011).
Promoting student well-being is a central organizing concept to the composition of
Temasek American School (TAS). The school believes that supporting the social and emotional
well-being of its students is important to the makeup of TAS as a learning institution. That
includes supporting students through major transitions, providing social and emotional programs,
cultivating a culture of extraordinary care, setting aside time for advisory programs in the middle
and high school divisions, and putting structures in place to support pastoral care (TAS Strategic
Focus, 2017). This study was designed to examine the success and challenges of implementing
Responsive Classroom, a SEL approach, in an international school setting so that Temasek
American School (TAS) can effectively and successfully utilize RC within the elementary
school.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

5
Organizational Context
Temasek American School.
Temasek American School (TAS) is the largest single-campus international school in the
world. Located in Singapore, it is a non-profit private school, educating 4,000 students
representing fifty countries. TAS is a well-funded and highly resourced school (Temasek
American School, n.d.). Five years ago, TAS began a research and development (R&D)
initiative to address the lack of 21st century skills such collaboration, communication, creative
thinking, and critical thinking in its curriculum, instruction, and assessment. TAS sent a team to
over 80 schools in five countries to research schools that were innovative, building student
relationships, and meeting the needs of students who were joining a highly global and diverse
workforce. This research developed into a strategic plan, with a focus built around Desired
Student Learning Outcomes (DSLOs) of content knowledge, collaboration, critical thinking,
cultural competence, creativity, communication, and character (Temasek American School, n.d.).
There is a growing recognition that today’s schools need to address the social and
emotional development of their students in order to ensure successful student performance
(CASEL, 2013; Denham & Weissberg, 2004; National Association for the Education of Young
Children, 2009; NAESP Foundation Task Force on Early Learning, 2011; National Research
Council, 2012; National School Readiness Indicators Initiative, 2005). By 2020, TAS will fully
implement the Responsive Classroom (RC) approach in the elementary school (K-5), warranting
that each student is known and cared for, and that each student develops social and emotional
skills. The goal of a school-wide SEL approach was recommended by the work of the R&D
committee and the recommendation was approved by the school’s board of directors. After the
R&D initiative, task forces were created to move each strategic plan forward. The SEL

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

6
committee, which consisted of the elementary school (ES) counseling PLC and an ES deputy
principal, was tasked with selecting a social emotional learning (SEL) approach for the ES based
on PERMA, Martin Seligman’s theoretical model of well-being (PERMA). This approach
needed to be tailored to the needs of the TAS community, while also incorporating the existing
Core Values and social skills lessons provided by the ES counseling team. The six ES school
counselors and deputy principal formed the SEL committee and spent a year auditing SEL
approaches, as well as participating in webinars with representatives from those approaches. At
the end of the 2015-2016 school year, the SEL committee selected Responsive Classroom (RC)
as the SEL approach for the ES.
2020 Strategic Plan: The Five Priorities.
In order to support the mission of being “a world leader in education, cultivating
exceptional thinkers, prepared for the future,” TAS formulated the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan.
This plan consists of five priorities: professional learning communities, a standards-based
approach, high-impact instructional strategies, pastoral care, and systems supporting learning.
SEL falls under the umbrella of pastoral care.
Organizational goal.
By June 2020, TAS will fully implement Responsive Classroom (RC) in the elementary
school (K-5), ensuring that every student is known and cared for and that each student develops
social and emotional skills. The goal of a school-wide SEL approach was recommended by the
work of the R&D committee and the recommendation was approved by the school board. Built
on their work and recommendation, the organizational goal was established by the SEL
committee, ES administrators, and the Office of Learning (OOL). Based on conversations with
RC trainers about implementation in other similarly sized schools, as well as factoring in the size

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

7
of the ES faculty and staff, the goal of full implementation by 2020 was determined to be both
realistic and attainable. This goal also aligns with the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan.
The Responsive Classroom Approach
The RC approach to teaching is aimed at bringing together social and academic learning
throughout the day (Rimm-Kaufman & Sawyer, 2004). The RC approach has been developed
over 20 years and has a plethora of resources and materials to support teachers, administrators,
and schools implementing the approach (CASEL, 2013; Rimm-Kaufman, Fan, Chiu, & You,
2007). According to the Center for Responsive Schools, the RC approach results in fewer
discipline referrals, less stress, a strong school community, a positive school climate, academic
engagement, and teacher retention (Responsive Classroom, 2018). The RC approach to social
and emotional learning differs from other SEL approaches in that it focuses on integrating SEL
and academics throughout the school day, places an equal emphasis on social and academic
learning, and provides practitioners with on-site training as well as ongoing coaching support
(Rimm-Kaufman, Storm, Sawyer, Pianta, & LaParo, 2006). There are currently 100 schools that
have adopted the RC approach, as well as 35,000 teachers who have been trained in that
approach (Rimm-Kaufman & Sawyer, 2004).
The RC approach is built upon specific practices to combine social, emotional, and
academic learning throughout the school day. Components of the RC approach, which further
these principles, include a morning meeting, rules and logical consequences, and academic
choice. These components build community and connection, help children gain self-control and
shared responsibility, and increase investment in learning (Rimm-Kaufman & Sawyer, 2004).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the implementation of Responsive Classroom

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

8
(RC) in an international school setting so that Temasek American School (TAS) can successfully
implement RC within its elementary school. This study looked at two comparable international
schools and their journey to RC implementation. This study defines effective and successful
implementation of the RC approach as a school-wide understanding of the four domains ―
engaging academics, positive community, developmentally responsive teaching, and effective
management ― and the school-wide use of key RC practices and strategies ― interactive
modeling, academic choice, morning meetings, teacher language: the three Rs, and responding to
misbehavior with consistency, respect, and empathy ― used with fidelity. As stated earlier,
fidelity refers to the use of interventions in the manner in which they were designed (Wanless et
al., 2012). This study seeks to understand how other international schools have implemented RC
with their elementary schools. It seeks to understand promising practices utilized by these well-
resourced and well respected international schools, as well as barriers experienced by these
schools when implementing RC.
Importance of the Study
TAS has never implemented a school-wide SEL approach. Without SEL implementation
experience, the TAS strategic anchors of extraordinary care, excellence, and possibility, as well
as the priority of pastoral care highlighted in the TAS Strategic Plan for 2020, may be impacted.
Research on RC points to the importance of high-quality implementation; without a clear plan on
delivering high-quality implementation, successful and effective school-wide use of RC will
remain problematic.
High-quality implementation and support are needed in order to ensure the success of
evidence-based SEL programs (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011). There is evidence to
indicate that a program’s success, as well as its impact on student outcomes, is undermined with

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

9
poor implementation and lack of support (CASEL, 2013; Durlak & Dupree, 2008; Durlak et al.,
2011; Elias et al., 2006). Research on implementation of the RC approach point to the
importance of individualized intervention coaches and principal buy-in (Wanless, Patton, Rimm-
Kaufman, & Deutsch, 2012). A meta-analysis of 213 studies found that the most common
problem when implementing SEL approaches is a lack of teacher and administrator support for
the program (Durlak et al., 2011).
In addition to principal buy-in, implementation is deemed successful when teachers have
access to individualized coaching and are provided with a psychologically safe context (Wanless
et al., 2012). Researchers such as Wanless and associates (2013) have found that relationships
which are cooperative, supportive, and operate with open communication are deemed ideal
relationships between coaches and teachers; further, they describe a psychologically safe
environment as one that allows teachers to work at their own pace, is socially supportive, one in
which administrators and peers understood what is happening and why it is happening within the
classroom.
Teachers who perceive principal buy-in, have access to individualized coaching, and can
implement new practices in a psychologically safe environment report more success with the RC
approach (Wanless et al., 2012). Successful implementation of the RC approach allows students
to perceive school more favorably; researchers have found that children’s perceptions of the
classroom are improved when teachers focus not just on academics, but also social and
emotional learning, which leads to long-term bonding to the school (Brock, Nishida, Chiong,
Grimm, & Rimm-Kaufman, 2008). Successful implementation of the RC approach allows
children to grow and strengthen feelings of autonomy, connection, and competence (Brock et al.,
2008).

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

10
There is no clarity around how TAS administrators will ensure their perceived buy-in of
RC. TAS administrators need to understand what will be expected of them as RC is
implemented throughout the ES. If TAS administrators are unaware of the important role they
play in implementation and the power they have in removing organizational barriers, they may
serve as a roadblock for the successful and effective of RC.
There is limited research on the implementation and development of the RC approach in
international schools. This study’s findings will serve as a roadmap for TAS as it moves forward
in its quest to provide SEL to help students develop social and emotional wellness, as stated in
the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan. Findings from the study can be used to avoid potential
implementation barriers; as well as developing promising practices that can be leveraged to help
TAS become a leader in the field of SEL, particularly with the RC approach.
On a global scale, the findings of this study may offer guidance to other international
schools as they look to implement SEL, particularly the RC approach, in their schools. This
study may provide an international perspective to the research and assist international schools to
tailor RC to the unique needs of their school community.
TAS devoted much time, resources and manpower to selecting the RC approach and the
initial training of the RC Core Team (30 elementary school teachers) during the 2016-2017
school year. Much more will be used to provide SEL to help students develop social and
emotional wellness, as stated in the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan. Therefore, it is important to
understand the implementation process used by other international schools who have
successfully implemented the RC approach and use the findings from this study to guide TAS on
the implementation of the RC.
Limitations

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

11
Sample. This study seeks to uncover possible promising practices and barriers to
implementing the RC approach in the elementary division of TAS. It is recognized that the study
is only of two international schools, the Mumbai American School and the London American
Community Elementary School. As such, the research may or may not be generalized to other
schools due to the size and population of the international school. In addition to participants
from the Mumbai American School and the London American Community Elementary School,
two administrators from the elementary school of Temasek American School will be
interviewed. Information from these participants will provide insight into the initial stages of the
implementation of RC at TAS and lay the foundation for important needed next steps. The
researcher will interview an RC consultant who has worked extensively with international
schools, in addition to a trainer, who will provide a broader perspective on successes and
challenges international schools face when implementing the RC approach. Finally, the
researcher will conduct a focus group comprised of Mumbai American School elementary
teachers. The information gathered from participants at the Mumbai American School, London
American Community Elementary School, and TAS through focus groups and interviews may be
biased as participants may be reticent to express less than positive feelings regarding school
initiatives. The information gathered from the RC trainer through interview may be biased as the
participant may be reluctant in expressing less than positive feelings regarding training and
implementation at certain international schools.
Researcher. The researcher is a member of the TAS elementary school division working
as an elementary school counselor (pre-kindergarten to grade one). She also served as a member
of the TAS R&D committee and is a participant in the TAS Leadership Cohort. She
acknowledges the possibility of being biased when conducting interviews and when reporting

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

12
implementation success at TAS.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions are provided to ensure understanding and uniformity of these
terms throughout the study. All definitions not accompanied by a citation are developed by the
researcher.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL): An organization with
the aim of establishing evidence-based and high-quality social and emotional learning as an
integral part of preschool through high school education. CASEL collaborates with educators
and policymakers to ensure SEL continues to be researched and promoted as an essential part of
education preschool through high school.
Desired Student Learning Outcomes (DSLOs): As part of a culture of possibilities, extraordinary
care, and excellence, TAS graduates will be immersed in and apply collaboration,
communication, cultural competence, critical thinking, character, creativity, and content
knowledge.
Pastoral Care: One of the five priorities in the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan. A culture of
extraordinary care and social and emotional learning falls under the umbrella of Pastoral Care.
PERMA Model: Martin Seligman’s (2012) theoretical framework of happiness and well-being.
PERMA stands for positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishments.
Positive Education: “Positive Education brings together the science of Positive Psychology with
the best practice teaching and learning to encourage and support schools and individuals within
their communities to flourish” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p. 19).
Positive Psychology: “The scientific study of the strengths that enable individuals and
communities to thrive. The field is founded on the belief that people want to lead meaningful and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

13
fulfilling lives, to cultivate what is best within themselves, and to enhance their experiences of
love, work, and play” (Positive Psychology Center, 2017).
Responsive Classroom (RC): “An evidence-based approach to teaching that focuses on engaging
academics, positive community, effective management, and development awareness”
(Responsive Classroom, 2017, p. ).
TAS Core Values: Values taught and modeled by students and staff. The five TAS Core Values
are compassion, fairness, honesty, respect, and responsibility.
Social and Emotional Learning (SEL): “The processes through which children and adults
acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and
manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and
maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions” (CASEL, 2013, p. 4).

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

14
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This literature review will provide the historical context for the Responsive Classroom
approach, which emphasizes that the social and emotional curriculum are of equal importance to
the academic curriculum. This belief builds upon the work of Martin Seligman and Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi (2014), considered to be the founders of positive psychology. Readers will
connect the dots between positive psychology, positive education, social and emotional learning
(SEL), and the Responsive Classroom (RC) approach. This review will then describe the
practices of the RC approach, which include the four interrelated domains of engaging
academics, positive community, effective management, and developmentally responsive
teaching. With these practices and domains fully described, this chapter will then offer a
summary of recent empirical research that supports the effectiveness of the RC approach.
Finally, this chapter will shift its focus to implementation, looking closely at what needs to be in
place for schools to successfully implement SEL and the RC approach.
Positive Psychology
Martin Seligman, as head of the American Psychological Association, and Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi challenged the field of psychology in 1998 by shifting the focus from a disease
model, which emphasizes repairing distress and dysfunction, to building on strengths, positive
qualities, and cultivating well-being (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). What would happen
if the focus switched to what makes a life worth living? What would happen if psychology
shifted from reaction to prevention? The goal of positive psychology is to expand the field of
psychology, in order to change the mindset from repairing the negatives in life to instead
promoting and cultivating the positives in life, moving from hopelessness to optimism (Norrish
& Seligman, 2015; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014; Waters, 2011). Seligman and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

15
Csikszentmihalyi (2014) argued that dominant theories no longer view the individual as passive,
simply responding to stimuli, but rather one who is capable of making decisions, having choices,
setting goals, and becoming masterful (as cited in Bandura, 1986; Seligman, 1992). According to
the Positive Psychology Center (2017), based out of the University of Pennsylvania, the
definition of positive psychology is:
. . . the scientific study of the strengths that enable individuals and communities to thrive.
The field is founded on the belief that people want to lead meaningful and fulfilling lives,
to cultivate what is best within themselves, and to enhance their experiences of love,
work, and play. (p.).
Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi’s challenge to the field of psychology built on the legacy
of the humanistic psychology movement, often referred to as the “third wave of psychology”
during the 1950s to 1970s, which was led by psychologists Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and
Eric Fromm (Kristjánsson, 2012; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). Although the term
“positive psychology” was coined in 1954 by Abraham Maslow in his book Motivation and
Personality (Maslow & Murphy, 1954), the movement of positive psychology really took hold in
2000 (Kristjánsson, 2012; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). Considered the “fourth wave of
psychology,” positive psychology aims to use empirical evidence, something that the humanistic
psychology movement was often criticized for lacking (Kristjánsson, 2012; Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2014), to show that hedonic positive emotions (the pleasant life), using
signature strengths, virtue, and flow (the engaged life or good life), and living a life of purpose
and meaning and serving others (the meaningful life) can have a profound and positive impact on
life satisfaction, as well as physical and mental health (Seligman, 2008).

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

16
Since 2000, positive psychology has grown in recognition and popularity. Countless
books and articles have been written on the many aspects of positive psychology such as grit,
resilience, mindfulness, character strengths, hope, and gratitude. Prominent names in the field
now include Angela Duckworth, Barbara Fredrickson, Carol Dweck, Christopher Peterson,
Donald Clifton, Lea Waters, and Tal Ben-Shahar. A graduate degree, such as the Master of
Applied Positive Psychology (MAPP), is offered by the University of Pennsylvania. The
International Positive Psychology Association (IPPA), headed by professor and psychologist
Barbara Fredrickson, has thousands of members representing more than 70 countries. The field
of positive psychology has now spread its reach to utilize its tenets of well-being (the pleasant
life, the good life, the purposeful life) to make a positive impact in the arenas of work and
organizations, health and well-being, clinical psychology, and education.
Positive Education
In 2005, Martin Seligman accepted an invitation to speak at Geelong Grammar School, a
private school on the outskirts of Melbourne, Australia. That invitation, precipitated by a
conversation between the Vice Principal of Geelong Grammar School and a parent who was
familiar with Seligman’s work, led to a yearlong sabbatical in 2008 at Geelong Grammar and the
subsequent formation of Positive Education. In his introduction to Positive Education: The
Geelong Grammar School Journey (2015), Seligman asked the reader to “imagine that schools
could, without compromising either side, teach both the skills of well-being and the skills for
achievement” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p. iv). With the guidance of Seligman, his team from
the University of Pennsylvania and visiting pioneers from the field of positive psychology,
Geelong Grammar School transformed educational practices through a whole-school

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

17
commitment to embrace well-being. Through this work, Geelong Grammar School became a
beacon for both the model and the myriad of benefits of Positive Education.
Definition of positive education. There are many definitions of positive education. It
has been defined as “applied positive psychology in education” (Oades, Robinson, & Green,
2011, p. 16). Positive education has also been defined as an approach to education that fosters
skills for happiness and well-being and academic skills (Seligman, Ernst, Gillham, Reivich, &
Linkin, 2009). Geelong Grammar School decided early on to move away from the term
“psychology,” as it was too often associated with mental ill health and not mental well-being.
The school decided to refer to its approach as “Positive Education,” as this reflects a promotion
of well-being and building on an individual’s strengths within the education setting. Geelong
Grammar School’s official definition of positive education states: “Positive Education brings
together the science of Positive Psychology with the best practice teaching and learning to
encourage and support schools and individuals within their communities to flourish” (Norrish &
Seligman, 2015, p. 19).
The model for positive education. From its inception, Geelong Grammar School aimed
to infuse the principles of positive psychology into all areas of the school, from the classroom to
all interactions between children and adults (Norrish & Seligman, 2015). This undertaking
meant students from the Early Learning Center to the Senior School, staff, parents and all
employees of the school would be exposed to and trained in the principles of positive education.
It also meant that these principles would need to be embedded into the curriculum. In order to
create a framework for such heavy lifting, a team from Geelong Grammar School and 20 experts
in the field of positive psychology created the Model for Positive Education (Norrish &
Seligman, 2015). This model is depicted as a circle with flourishing at its center and six “leaves”

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

18
attached to the circle, with each leaf representing a domain of Positive Education. The six
domains, extended and adapted from Seligman’s PERMA model, are: positive relationships,
positive emotions, positive health, positive engagement, positive accomplishment, and positive
purpose (Norrish & Seligman, 2015; Seligman, 2012). Finally, the model is supported by
character strengths, which serve as a pathway to the six domains. The Applied Model for
Positive Education is generated by the four levels of “learn it,” “live it,” “teach it,” and “embed
it.” A firmly held belief within the field of Positive Education is that these domains can be both
explicitly taught and assessed by schools (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2009; Oades et al., 2011;
Seligman et al., 2009, Seligman & Norrish, 2015; Waters, 2011). The six domains, and how
they are embedded into Geelong Grammar School, are as follows.
Positive relationships. This domain focuses on developing social and emotional skills,
so that students can cultivate and grow their relationship with themselves and their relationships
with others. Having supportive relationships and feeling connected is fundamentally essential
(Norrish & Seligman, 2015), so much so that Chris Peterson (2013) summarized Positive
Psychology with the phrase, “Other people matter” (p. 127). According to Roy Baumeister,
“Research suggests that in order to be happy, you need four to six other people who care about
you, whom you can talk to, whom you like and who like you” (as cited in Norrish & Seligman,
2015, p. 102). John Hattie (2008), in his review of over 800 meta-analyses, found that the
second strongest predictor, after individual student factors, was the relationship between a
student and his or her teacher. This relationship was a greater predictor of success than the
combination of school, home, and peer factors (Hattie, 2008; Norrish & Seligman, 2015).
Research has also consistently shown that schools must be safe and supportive environments to
ensure well-being (McGraw, Moore, Fuller, & Bates, 2008; Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Safe

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

19
and supportive environments are nurtured through forgiveness, restorative practices, and a belief
that mistakes are for learning. Geelong Grammar School’s staff holds the conviction that
“people have the power to harm each other and to heal each other, and they should always aim to
heal” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p.). This goal is achieved when students have strong social
and emotional skills and an awareness that conflict is minimized when they understand that their
behavior impacts others. Geelong Grammar embeds the concept of positive relationships into all
aspects of the school by explicitly teaching kindness, forgiveness, and reparation. The belief is
that quality relationships are determined by integrity, forgiveness, optimism (hope), compassion,
and trust (Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Younger students learn about Tom Rath and Donald
Clifton’s (2004) “bucket-and-dipper theory,” while older students learn about active constructive
responding.
Positive emotions. This domain focuses on identifying and developing an understanding
of emotions, both one’s own and those of others. It recognizes that unpleasant or strong
emotions (anger, sadness, anxiety) are a part of daily life and that they play an important role
(Norris & Seligman, 2015). Understanding feelings helps students develop good communication
skills and empathy, a pathway to flourishing socially. Research has found a connection between
academic performance and emotional health, which could suggest that students with secure
emotional regulation capabilities are able to blossom in their studies (Gumora & Arsenio, 2002;
Norris & Seligman, 2015). This domain relies on Barbara Fredrickson’s (1998, 2009) “broaden
and build” theory. This theory, based on research, shows that the more we build and focus on
our positive emotions, the broader we apply our positive emotions, reaping more benefits
(Fredrickson, 1998; Fredrickson, 2009, Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Fredrickson’s (2009)
“positivity toolkit,” which includes 12 evidence-based techniques for growing positive emotions,

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

20
is integrated throughout the Model for Positive Emotion (Fredrickson, 2009; Norrish &
Seligman, 2015). The twelve strategies are: be open, create high-quality connections, cultivate
kindness, develop distractions, dispute negative thinking, find nature nearby, learn and apply
your strengths, meditate mindfully, meditate on loving kindness, ritualise gratitude, savor
positivity, and visualise your future (Fredrickson, 2009).
Positive health. This domain focuses on building an understanding of the connection
between psychological and physical health so that students understand the mind-body
connection, as well as on mindfulness and resilience. Geelong Grammar School’s definition of
resiliency, based on the work of Professor Karen Reivich, states: “Resilience is the ability to
grow and thrive in the face of challenges and bounce back from adversity. Resilience enables
you to take calculated risks and capitalize on opportunities” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p.;
Reivich, 2010, p.). Staff are exposed to resiliency skills and, beginning in Year 7, students are
explicitly taught lessons using the Penn Resiliency Program (PRP). This program is widely
researched (Seligman et al., 2009) and students who take part in this program report lower levels
of anxiety and depression; they show fewer negative behaviors and hopelessness, and they report
greater optimism (Brunwasser, Gillham, & Kim, 2009; Cutuli, Chaplin, Gillham, Reivich, &
Seligman, 2006; Gillham, Hamilton, Freres, Patton, & Gallop, 2006; Norrish & Seligman, 2015).
The main goal of the PRP “is to increase students’ ability to handle day-to-day stressors and
problems that are common for most students during adolescence” (cited in Seligman et al., 2009,
p. 297). Younger students learn about resilience by looking after a ball for 24 hours, then an egg
for 24 hours. The students then compare the two in terms of resilience. Students also learn how
to be open through mindfulness practices. Mindfulness is a positive influence on both physical
and mental health by calming the stress response, which in turn leads to the body healing and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

21
regulating itself (Kabat-Zinn & Hanh, 2009; Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Mindfulness has also
been shown to have a positive effect on students with attention deficit disorder, as well as
reducing aggression and misbehavior (Meiklejohn et al., 2012; Norrish & Seligman, 2015). In
addition to lessons on resilience and mindfulness, students at Geelong Grammar also learn about
the foundations for well-being: exercise, healthy sleep habits, and good nutrition (Norrish &
Seligman, 2015).
Positive engagement. This domain builds on the work of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi.
Students and staff are introduced to pathways to obtain complete immersion in activities, which
then leads to engagement and flow. When students experience engagement, motivation and
learning increases (Norris & Seligman, 2015). According to Dr. Sue Jackson, “Flow provides a
model for optimal engagement with a task. At the heart of this model is the balance between
challenges and skills in a situation. For flow to occur, both challenges and skills (for the
individual) need to be high and in balance” (as cited in Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p. 199).
Teachers can assist students to achieve engagement by exposing them to the flow model, helping
in setting goals, and providing clear feedback on student progress (Norrish & Seligman, 2015).
Engagement has been shown to be a pathway to a fulfilling life (Norrish & Seligman, 2015;
Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005; Seligman, 2012), as well as fostering self-confidence and
optimism (Froh et al., 2010; Hunter & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003; Norrish & Seligman, 2015).
Students who are actively engaged in their learning and intrinsically motivated are able to take
these skills out of the classroom and use them to lead enriching lives.
Positive accomplishment. This domain focuses on what most people think is the aim of
schools, which is to help students learn and achieve academically, in addition to cultivating
individual student potential through attaining meaningful outcomes. Although this domain is

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

22
tied to academics, students at Geelong Grammar School are encouraged and given opportunities
to achieve positive accomplishments through altruistic acts and giving back to the community.
This is accomplished through building efficacy through mastery experiences (Bandura, 1997),
setting goals, and focusing on hope rather than failure (Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Within the
Model for Positive Education, this “focuses on achievements that nurture the self and others
academically, physically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p.
230). In fact, Seligman’s vision for positive education is this exact balance of teaching skills for
academic success and skills for well-being and flourishing without compromising either (Norrish
& Seligman, 2015; Seligman, 2008). Within this domain is Dweck’s “growth mindset” theory.
She proposed that people have two mindsets, a fixed mindset or a growth mindset, with the latter
allowing for talent and intelligence to grow. A growth mindset also factors in the belief that grit,
the combination of determination and effort, is a key trait of a growth mindset and, as a result,
determinant of success (Dweck, 2006; Norrish & Seligman, 2015). Research has shown grit to
be a predictor of academic and life success, much more of a predictor than natural talent,
intelligence, and personality (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007). Seligman (2011)
built on Duckworth’s research on grit by proposing the following formula: “grit = skill x effort,
where skill is natural ability and effort is the amount of time devoted to practice and obtaining
experience” (Norrish & Seligman, 2015, p. 240).
Positive purpose. This domain involves serving something bigger than self, focusing on
something worthwhile and meaningful, and embracing altruism. Geelong Grammar School adds
that, “this domain also recognizes that belonging to a close school community is a protective
factor for mental and physical health, and a pillar of a purposeful and meaningful life” (Norris &
Seligman, 2015, p. 34). Students at Geelong Grammar School engaged in activities for the

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

23
greater good by making paper cranes and sending them to schools in Japan after the 2011
earthquake and tsunami; younger students organized a fundraiser so that they could assemble
bears at Build-a-Bear and donate them to a local children’s hospital, and older students formed a
homework club for Karan refugee children from Myanmar. This domain focuses on values,
which then instill the importance of giving back and contributing to both the school community
and the community beyond the school campus. Research on well-being has consistently found
that giving to others is linked to good mental and physical health (Norrish & Seligman, 2015;
Post, 2005; Post & Neimark, 2008; Steger, Kashdan, & Oishi, 2008).
Character strengths. Character strengths serve as the base for the Model of Positive
Education, i.e., a pathway to the domains and connects the domains to one another. Using the
Values in Action Classification of Character Strengths (VIA), students and staff have a common
language to identify, understand, and develop strengths (Norrish & Seligman, 2015; Peterson &
Seligman, 2004). The VIA is made up of six core virtues, which are then unpacked into 24-
character strengths (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Brdar and Kashdan (2010) defined character
strengths as “pre-existing qualities that arise naturally, feel authentic, are intrinsically motivating
to use and energising” (p. 151). The VIA and Geelong Grammar School help students, parents,
and staff spot, nurture, and celebrate individual signature strengths through a variety of activities
(Norris & Seligman, 2015). Norrish and Seligman (2015) explained that, “through a focus on
character strengths, the emphasis moves beyond external markers of success to the morally
valued attributes of each child and adult” (p. 83). Researchers have found that certain character
strengths (love, hope, curiosity, zest) have high correlations with life satisfaction (Peterson &
Seligman, 2004; Peterson, Ruch, Beermann, Park, & Seligman, 2007; Waters, 2011), while
others (perseverance, fairness, gratitude, honesty, hope, perspective) have been shown to be

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

24
predictors of grade-point above-average IQ (Park & Peterson, 2009; Waters, 2011), while others
(hope, kindness, social intelligence, self-control, perspective) serve buffers to trauma and stress
(Park & Peterson, 2009; Waters, 2011). Researchers have also learned that character strengths,
whether using the VIA or the Gallup Strengths Framework, can be explicitly taught and students
can develop their signature strengths to have a positive impact on their own well-being (Austin,
2005; Seligman et al., 2009; Waters, 2011).
Social and Emotional Learning
The work of Geelong Grammar School, Seligman and his colleagues, and the Model of
Positive Education highlight both the importance and the benefits of addressing, not just the
academic needs of children, but also their social and emotional requirements. A challenge for
21st-century schools is to create communities that foster academic growth, in addition to
supporting and explicitly teaching social and emotional skills to a culturally, economically, and
socially diverse student population with varying abilities and motivations (Learning First
Alliance, n.d.). When schools realize that teaching and learning are made up of academic, social,
and emotional components (Durlak et al., 2011; Zins, 2004), they can then empower students to
be prepared for and to thrive in the 21
st
Century as global citizens. Tony Wagner, author and
education advocate, believes that the education we currently provide for students is not preparing
them effectively for the future. Wagner (2014) described the urgency for providing these skills
to students:
In today’s highly competitive global knowledge economy, all students need new skills for
college, careers, and citizenship. To fail to give all students these new skills leaves
today’s youth and our country at an alarming competitive disadvantage. Schools haven’t
changed; the world has. And so our schools, then, are not failing. They are obsolete-

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

25
even the ones that score the best on standardized tests-which is a very different problem
requiring an altogether different solution. (p.)
Delivering school-wide social and emotional learning (SEL) is a promising approach to
promoting social and emotional development, and thus increasing students’ success in both
school and life (Durlak et al., 2011, Elias, 1997). Developmental research (Eisenberg, Fabes, &
Spinrad, 2006; Guerra & Bradshaw, 2008; Masten & Coatsworth, 1998; Weissberg &
Greenberg, 1998) indicated that “effective mastery of social-emotional competencies is
associated with greater well-being and better school performance whereas the failure to achieve
competencies in these areas can lead to a variety of personal, social, and academic difficulties”
(as cited in Durlak et al., 2011, p.).
Definition of social and emotional learning.
There are many definitions for SEL. At its broadest, social and emotional learning is an
approach which reduces risk factors, while increasing positive adjustment, through the
promotion of protective mechanisms (Benson, 2006; Durlak et al., 2011; Guerra & Bradshaw,
2008; Weissberg, Kumpfer, & Seligman, 2003). A much more specific definition of SEL,
according to Elias (1997) is “the process of acquiring core competencies to recognize and
manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, appreciate the perspective of others, establish
and maintain positive relationships, make responsible decisions, and handle interpersonal
situations constructively” (as cited in Durlak et al., 2011, p. 406). Building on this definition,
Wanless and Domitrovich (2015) included the need for explicit teaching and strategies,
describing SEL as “fostering social and emotional competencies in children through various
strategies including direct instruction and student-centered practices that create engaging
learning environments nurturing students’ development of analytical, communication, and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

26
collaboration skills” (p. 1038). The Collaboration for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
(2012) defined SEL as:
The processes through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the
knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and
achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive
relationships, and make responsible decisions. (p. 4)
Much like the underlying beliefs of positive psychology and positive education, SEL
hopes to empower individuals to be active, rather than passive, participants in their lives.
Building on the research of Bear and Watkins (2006), Durlak et al. (2011) highlighted this shift
in self-perception and self-efficacy by pointing out that, “Over time, mastering SEL
competencies results in a developmental progression that leads to a shift from being
predominantly controlled by external factors to acting increasingly in accord with internalized
beliefs and values, caring and concern for others, making good decisions, and taking
responsibility for one’s choices and behaviors” (p. 406).
Collaboration for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
The Collaboration for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), a non-profit
organization, was formed in 1994 with the purpose of advocating for an integrated academic,
social, and emotional learning approach for every student (preschool to high school), as well as
promoting SEL “science, evidence-based practice, and policy” (CASEL, 2013, p. 4). Like the
Model of Positive Education with its six domains, CASEL has developed five core cognitive,
affective, and behavioral competencies. These interrelated core competencies are: self-
awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision
making (CASEL, 2013). These core competencies help positively shape student beliefs and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

27
attitudes about school, their classmates, and about themselves (CASEL, 2013). Mastering them
helps to determine whether students are able to engage in learning, meet the demands of the
classroom, and reap the benefits of instruction (Campbell & von Stauffenberg, 2008; CASEL,
2013; Denham, Brown, & Domitrovich, 2010).
In addition to advancing SEL research and policy, CASEL began identifying “SELect
programs” in 2003. SEL programs have been proven to be a successful intervention in
promoting positive student development (CASEL, 2013). In a meta-analysis of 213 studies,
Durlak et al. (2011) found that “SEL programming improves students’ academic achievement
and positive social behavior while reducing their conduct problems and emotional distress”
(cited in CASEL, 2013, p. 4). SEL programs are identified as “CASEL SELect” if they are:
well-designed and classroom-based, offer implementation supports and high-quality training, and
are evidence-based with documentation of positive impacts on behavior and/or academic student
performance (CASEL, 2013, p. 7).
Well-designed and classroom-based. To included as a CASEL SELect program, the
program must be well-designed and classroom-based; to meet this criterion, the program must
address all five of the CASEL competencies: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness,
relationship skills, and responsible decision making (CASEL, 2013). Effective programs provide
repeated opportunities for students to practice, which includes applying new skills both inside
and outside of the classroom (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011; Durlak, Weissberg, & Pachan,
2010). Research (Durlak et al., 2012; Durlak et al., 2010) has provided evidence that SEL
programs allow for better student outcomes when using “SAFE” procedures. According to the
2013 CASEL guide, SAFE procedures, “use a Sequenced step-by-step training approach; they
emphasize Active forms of learning that require students to practice new skills; they Focus

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

28
specific time and attention on skills development; and they are Explicit in defining the social and
emotional skills they are attempting to promote” (p. 16). In addition to addressing all five
competencies and being SAFE, CASEL SELect programs should be multi-year; research
(CASEL, 2013; Greenberg et al., 2003) has shown that the most effective programs are multi-
year and, ideally, preschool up to grade 12.
Training and other implementation support. The second criterion for inclusion as a
CASEL SELect program is high-quality initial and ongoing implementation and training. High-
quality implementation increases the effectiveness of well-designed programs, and
implementation is enhanced through training. According to CASEL research, “teachers who
receive initial training to support a particular program are more likely to teach all of the lessons
in that particular program. They will use the methods prescribed by the program more effectively
than teachers who do not receive training” (CASEL, 2013, p. 16). Research has recognized that
programs are largely dependent on implementation and that poor implementation can factor into
a program’s lack of success (CASEL, 2013; Durlak & Dupree, 2008; Durlak et al., 2011).
Administration plays a key role in successful implementation, as research has highlighted that
both support and modeling of program language and practices positively impact implementation
(CASEL, 2013; Elias, O’Brien, & Weissberg, 2006; Wanless et al., 2012). In order to be
included as a CASEL SELect program, the program must provide initial and ongoing training, as
well as materials (manuals, books, lesson plans, supplies) to support participants once the
program begins (CASEL, 2013).
Evidence of effectiveness. Another requirement for inclusion as a CASEL SELect
program is that the program be empirically researched. As SEL has grown in popularity, so too
has research supporting the effectiveness of SEL programs (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011;

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

29
2012; Zins et al., 2004). Empirical research is key to measuring the efficacy of program
effectiveness. CASEL SELect programs must be evaluated using a variety of measurements
(CASEL, 2013). First, programs must use a comparison group, and a pre- and post-measurement
to determine effectiveness. In addition to these two design features, programs must be evaluated
in a preschool or elementary (up to fifth grade) school setting and documentation must measure
academic behavior and/or student social behavior. CASEL SELect programs cannot rely solely
on measures of perceptions or attitudes.
The Responsive Classroom Approach
The Responsive Classroom (RC) approach, developed by the Northeast Foundation for
Children, aims at bringing social and academic learning together, as well as cultivating safe,
joyful, and challenging classrooms (Wanless, Rimm-Kaufman, Abry, Larsen, & Patton, 2014).
The RC approach places emphasis on teacher change; specifically, it “asks teachers to align their
beliefs, practices, and language about children to reflect a teaching philosophy based in
developmental psychology” (Wanless et al., 2012, p. 51). The RC approach was selected as a
CASEL SELect program based on its empirical evidence of effectiveness and its design, as well
as the initial and ongoing training it provides. According to CASEL, “The Responsive
Classroom approach is designed to create classrooms that are responsive to children’s physical,
emotional, social, and intellectual needs through developmentally appropriate educational
experiences in kindergarten through sixth grade” (CASEL, 2013, p. 58). In addition to being
selected as a CASEL SELect program, the Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education at
Teachers College, Columbia University, found that every $1 schools spent on RC has a return of
almost $9 per student (Belfield et al., 2015).
Characteristics of the responsive classroom approach.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

30
The RC approach builds social-emotional and academic skills through a set of practices.
Educators using the RC approach build aptitude in four interrelated domains. These domains
are: engaging academics, positive community, effective management, and developmentally
responsive teaching (Center for Responsive Schools, 2015). The RC approach has seven guiding
principles that serve as the bedrock for all practices: the social and emotional curriculum is
equally as important as the academic curriculum; importance paid to what children learn and
how they learn; social interaction produces great cognitive growth; children need to learn a set of
social-emotional skills (cooperation, assertiveness, responsibility, empathy, and self-control) to
be successful academically and socially; knowing every child we teach ― individually,
culturally, and developmentally ― is as important as knowing the content we teach; it is equally
important to know the families of the children we teach as well as knowing the children we
teach; and adults at the school working together bring about lasting change (CRS, 2015; Rimm-
Kaufman et al., 2006). Based on these seven guiding principles, several practices emerge,
including establishing rules, interactive modeling, teacher language, response to misbehavior,
academic choice, and morning meetings. These practices emphasize self-regulatory, social, and
emotional skills, as well as foster classroom environments which promote learning (Rimm-
Kaufman et al., 2006).
Establishing rules. Proponents of the RC approach believe in the creation of classroom
and school-wide rules to ensure effective discipline and to serve as a daily reminder for students
and staff about “the ideals for rigorous and joyful learning that guide life at school” (Wood &
Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 31). The creation of classroom rules is spread out over several days
and follows a formula in order to ensure student voice is captured and rules are framed in the
positive (CRS, 2015). The first day begins with a group conversation about the question, “Why

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

31
do we come to school?” This serves as a springboard for listing the hopes and dreams of each
student. The classroom teacher asks students what rules are needed to address both schoolwork
and individual hopes and dreams. Through this discussion, students brainstorm for rules and
group the rules into the categories of “place,” “self,” and “each other.” Before the classroom
rules are published, using student's’ artwork and design, the teacher adds his/her own rule. After
classroom rules have been created, school stakeholders are asked to envision a school where all
students are doing their best learning. This conversation, facilitated through open-ended
questions and an emphasis on the school’s mission, serves to create school-wide rules that
capture the school’s values and aspirations, as well as building a concrete foundation for guiding
students towards positive behavior (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). The RC approach
recommends that classroom and school-wide rules should be stated in the positive (tell the
students what to do instead of what not to do); be worded broadly and inspire conversation and
thinking; be developmentally appropriate (students in common spaces should use quiet voices,
instead of students in common spaces should use no voices); and rules should be briefly worded
and few in number (ideally three to five) (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). To conclude the
creation of school wide rules, some schools have an unveiling ceremony and invite all
stakeholders (students, parents, staff, etc.) to celebrate the communal effort and hard work.
Interactive modeling. Interactive modeling is a strategy that can be used to teach
academic, social and emotional skills through explicit instruction and practice (Wood &
Freeman-Loftis, 2015). This strategy can be used by classroom teachers and administrators, as
well as all adults in the school. Interactive modeling follows seven steps: 1) say what you will
model and why; 2) model the behavior; 3) ask students what they noticed; 4) invite one or more
students to model; 5) ask students what they noticed; 6) have all students model; and 7) provide

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

32
feedback (CRS, 2015, p. 39). In order to aid in the effectiveness of interactive modeling, the RC
approach uses signals for attention which can be either visual or auditory. Common signals used
are a raised hand or the use of a chime, bell, or rattle (CRS, 2015). In addition to using
interactive modeling in the classroom, this strategy can be an effective tool when used school-
wide by all staff members to promote positive behaviors. Explicit instruction helps students
know exactly what is expected of them. Often students misbehave, “because they don’t
understand clearly what’s expected or they haven’t had sufficient practice in the expected
behavior” (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 61). Research has shown that teachers who spent
more time at the beginning of the school year giving explicit instructions about routines and
expectations, a practice that closely aligns with interactive modeling, spent less time later in the
year during transitions (Cameron, Connor, & Morrison, 2005; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2006). The
RC approach recommends modeling more rather than less, giving lots of reminders, frequently
reinforcing positive behavior, and consistently being firm when enforcing standards (Wood &
Freeman-Loftis, 2015). Interactive modeling allows teachers to practice reinforcing language
and helps students cement the desired learning by pointing out what they did well. Reinforcing
helps “children gain competency by building on their strengths, not their weaknesses, and our
naming lets children know their strengths so they can do this building” (Wood & Freeman-
Loftis, 2015, p. 69). To ensure interactive modeling is used effectively and consistently
throughout the school, the RC approach recommends devoting staff meetings to the seven steps,
providing scripts, having administration model the strategy and allowing time for teachers to
observe one another using interactive modeling (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015).
Teacher language. The RC approach puts emphasis on a shift in teacher language.
Psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1978) believed in the power of language in that it can mold

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

33
thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Teachers and staff who use positive language, through both
words and tone of voice, help students develop positive behaviors and become engaged in their
learning (Denton, 2013; Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). A shift in teacher language is
important “because our choice of words, our intentions behind those words, and the manner in
which we deliver our words all have a profound effect on how students perceive themselves and
their world” (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 46). The RC approach outlines five guidelines
to teacher language which provide the foundation for specific teacher language strategies. These
guidelines are: 1) be direct and genuine; 2) convey faith in children’s abilities and intentions; 3)
focus on action; 4) keep it brief; and 5) know when to be silent (Denton, 2013, p. 12). Teachers
who are direct and genuine give clear directions, use statements rather than questions, maintain
an even tone, avoid sarcasm, and check that their body language matches their verbal language.
In her book, The Power of Our Words, Paula Denton (2013) unpacked these five guidelines
through specific examples. A teacher conveys faith in children’s abilities and intentions by
pointing out the positives; they avoid “baby talk;” and they are aware of language that treats
genders differently. Teacher language which focuses on action connects abstract terms with
concrete examples, describes behavior rather than the character or attitude of students, and is
non-judgmental in wording. It is brief in that it avoids long explanations and warnings. Lastly,
teachers know when to be silent by providing wait time, modeling pausing before responding,
listening to what students have to say, and avoiding the use of voice-overs (repeating a student’s
response directly after it is said). In addition to the strategies of envisioning, open-ended
questioning, and listening, the RC approach emphasizes the use of reinforcing, reminding, and
redirecting language (CRS, 2015; Denton, 2013; Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). Reinforcing
language relies on teacher observation of children and the naming of their strengths. This

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

34
language identifies and affirms student’s positive actions and highlights their skills, attitudes, and
behaviors. It avoids general praise and instead focuses on specifically naming what students are
doing well. This sends a message to students that adults see them, something especially
important for discouraged students “who may be accustomed to being ‘seen’ by adults only when
they fall short of expectations” (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 52). The following examples
help identify and affirm children’s positive behaviors: “I see you checking your work before
turning it in” or “I noticed people using active listening on the carpet.” Reminding language
helps students remember expectations, especially when students begin a challenging activity or
are starting to show signs of inappropriate actions (CRS, 2015; Denton, 2013; Wood & Freeman-
Loftis, 2015). Teachers can use interactive modeling to explicitly remind students of
expectations, or they can use a reminder in the form of a question. (Denton, 2013). The
following examples help prompt children to think about expectations and what they already
know: “What are you supposed to be doing right now?” or “Once you’ve finished writing your
ending, what do you do next?” Reminding language can be proactive or reactive, should be
briefly stated, and should be used in a neutral, sarcasm-free tone (CRS, 2015; Denton, 2013;
Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). Redirecting language should be used “when students are doing
something dangerous to themselves or others, are too emotional to remember expectations and
think reasonably about what they’re supposed to be doing or are otherwise too deeply invested in
their off-track behavior to correct themselves” (CRS, 2015, p. 71). Redirecting language should
be direct and specific, should name the desired behavior, be brief, use statements rather than
questions, and set clear and firm limits (CRS, 2015; Denton, 2013; Wood & Freeman-Loftis,
2015). The following examples help children act differently while preserving their sense of
belonging and self-respect: “Put the game cards away now” or “Everyone line up and face

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

35
forward.” Teachers should avoid using “please,” “thank you,” and the phrase “for me” when
using redirecting language as it implies teachers are asking children for a favor or to please the
teacher (Denton, 2013). The RC approach places high emphasis on the power of teacher
language. Administrators can support the shift in teacher language by devoting staff meetings to
positive language and the five guidelines; providing training for instructional assistants and other
adults working with children; having administration model the use of positive language; and
allowing time for teachers to observe one another using positive language (Wood & Freeman-
Loftis, 2015). A school-wide shift in the language adults use with children “influences how they
see themselves, their teacher, their classmates, and their experiences with learning” (Denton,
2013, p. 31).
Responding to misbehavior. Proponents of the RC approach believe that testing rules
and limits is a normal part of development and empathy should be used as well as faith that
children can and do want to behave (CRS, 2015). Empathy does not mean ignoring
accountability; instead, the RC approach provides a framework for responding to misbehavior.
Knowing and understanding that children sometimes misbehave means schools need to have
clear and consistent procedures in place for responding to misbehavior. These procedures help
ensure that “when a child makes a mistake, everyone remains safe, the child feels respected and
learns from the mistake, and everyone gets back to productive learning as soon as possible”
(Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 121). Strategies include the use of visual and verbal cues,
increased teacher proximity, reminding and redirecting language, and the use of logical
consequences (CRS, 2015). Reminding and redirecting language should address the misbehavior
immediately when it begins, and logical consequences should be respectful, relevant, and
realistic (CRS, 2015; Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015). Examples of non-punitive consequences

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

36
include simple reparation (a “do over,” or “you break it, you fix it”), increased structure and
supervision (taking objects away, moving the child, narrowing choices, and taking a privilege or
responsibility away), as well as a take-a-break (CRS, 2015; Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015).
This last consequence, sometimes referred to as a “positive time-out” (Wood & Freeman-Loftis,
2015), can take the form of an in-classroom take-a-break, a buddy teacher take-a-break, or a
private take-a-break. The goal of this consequence is for the child to regain self-control so “he
can come back and rejoin the group in a positive way” (Wood & Freeman-Loftis, 2015, p. 125).
Interactive modeling is used at the start of the year to model the three ways to take-a-break.
Balancing firmness with kindness, consistency with a recognition that one-size-does-not-fit-all,
assuming positive intent, and viewing children through a developmental lens are all components
of the RC approach to misbehavior.
Academic choice. Academic choice is based on the belief that students have choices
about content (what they learn) as well as process (how they learn). Academic choice, based on
the natural learning cycle, follows three phases: planning (students generate ideas and make
choices about their work); working (students explore, experiment, and problem solve); and
reflecting (students reflect on their learning and experiences) (CRS, 2015; Abry, Rimm-
Kaufman, Larsen, & Brewer, 2013). Academic choice can be used in establishing rules, as well
as all subject areas. Outcomes of using academic choice include increased student motivation,
more opportunities for skillful social interactions, strengthening of thinking and problem-solving
skills, as well as a decrease in problem behaviors (CRS, 2015, Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2006).
Morning meetings. Although the RC approach is often known for morning meetings,
this is only one component of the approach. Morning meetings are a daily circle-time for
students during which they go through four components: greet each other, share personal news,

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

37
participate in a group activity, and read through an interactive message created by the teacher
(Abry et al., 2013; CRS, 2015; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2006). These four components are done
in order. The goals of the morning meeting are to set a positive tone for the day, fulfill students’
need to belong, and merge academic, social, and emotional learning, as well as practice social
skills (CRS, 2015). Elias and Weissberg (2000) wrote, “considerable value exists in making sure
all students are welcomed to school each day so that they feel their presence makes a positive
difference to members of the school community” (p. 189). Morning meetings follow a format
and should last twenty to thirty minutes, depending on the age of the children. At the beginning
of the year, students are introduced to morning meetings through interactive modeling and rules
and procedures for morning meetings are posted in the meeting area. Teachers can use a signal
(raised hand or chime) to bring attention. The RC approach offers numerous resources to
support teachers with greetings, group activities, and ideas for age appropriate morning
messages.
Implementation
High-quality implementation and support are needed to ensure the success of evidence-
based SEL programs (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011). Research has shown that a program’s
success, as well as the impact on student outcomes, is undermined with poor implementation and
lack of support (CASEL, 2013; Durlak & Dupree, 2008; Durlak et al., 2011; Elias et al., 2006).
So how do schools go about implementing SEL programs and ensuring success? High-quality
implementation of SEL programs requires the following: implementation readiness, initial
training and ongoing professional development, school-wide support, and the use of data to
improve practices.
Implementation readiness.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

38
Setting the stage, understanding and communicating the need for a shift in thinking, and
clearly outlining that implementation is a journey and not a sprint are crucial first steps in
implementation. Considering readiness, or what is sometimes referred to as capacity, before
implementing a new program or intervention is an essential first step (CASEL, 2013; Elias &
Weissberg, 2000; Meyers, Durlak, & Wandersman, 2012; Wanless & Domitrovich, 2015).
Schools may be motivated to implement a new program, but that may not be enough. Special
consideration needs to be paid to organizational culture, how receptive staff are to the new
initiative, leadership, willingness to allocate resources, and staff knowledge and skills (Meyers et
al., 2012; Scaccia et al., 2015; Wanless & Domitrovich, 2015). As Schein (2010) pointed out:
If we understand the dynamics of culture, we will be less likely to be puzzled, irritated,
and anxious when we encounter the unfamiliar and seemingly irrational behavior of
people in organizations, and we will have a deeper understanding not only of why various
groups of people or organizations can be so different, but also why it is so hard to change
them. (p. 10).
A formula to conceptualize implementation readiness is R = MC² (Readiness =
Motivation x General Capacity x Intervention-Specific Capacity), which can help schools
understand both the general and specific readiness of their organization (Scaccia et al., 2015;
Wanless & Domitrovich, 2015). Understanding culture is something that author and professor
John Kotter (1995), a leading expert on change, discussed in the course of his work, observing
that the change process goes through a series of phases that requires a considerable length of
time. Skipping phases, although giving the appearance of speed, often leads to failed change.
Kotter also noted that mistakes in any of the phases can lead to slow momentum, harmful impact,
and negative gains. According to Kotter, the first important step is establishing a great enough

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

39
sense of urgency. As part of its School Theory of Action for Systemic SEL, CASEL
recommends the following steps to help guide schools prior to implementing a SEL program:
establish a shared SEL vision with stakeholders; conduct a SEL-needs inventory; and develop an
implementation plan (CASEL, 2013). Frequently communicating a shared SEL vision, as well
as conducting a needs inventory, will help in creating a sense of urgency. Once the sense of
urgency is communicated, then leaders need to communicate a shared vision. Having a secure
understanding of a shared vision will help ease the discomfort that “second order” change brings.
A second order change is one that involves stakeholders learning new approaches even when it
may not be obvious how these new approaches and changes will make things better as a culture
of learning (Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2004).
Initial training and ongoing professional development.
Criterion for inclusion as a CASEL SELect program is high-quality initial and ongoing
implementation and training (CASEL, 2013). High-quality implementation increases the
effectiveness of well-designed programs and is enhanced through training. According to CASEL
research, “teachers who receive an initial training to support a particular program are more likely
to teach all of the lessons in that particular program. They will use the methods prescribed by the
program more effectively than teachers who do not receive training” (CASEL, 2013, p. 16). As
part of its School Theory of Action for Systemic SEL, CASEL recommends providing initial
training and ongoing professional development (CASEL, 2013). Through training and ongoing
professional development, schools can build internal capacity. The RC approach, which has
been developed over a period of twenty years, provides an initial four-day training to
participants. In addition, the RC approach has a plethora of materials ( e.g., books, monthly
newsletters, workshops, videos), and provides ongoing professional development through

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

40
follow-up training (Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2007). Research from focus groups, conducted by the
University of Virginia, found that implementation is deemed successful when teachers have
access to individualized coaching and are provided with a psychologically safe context (Wanless
et al., 2012). Researchers have found that relationships that are cooperative, supportive, and
operate with open communication are deemed ideal relationships between coaches and teachers
(Wanless et al., 2012). A psychologically safe environment is described as one that allows
teachers to work at their own pace, is socially supportive, and one in which administrators and
peers understood what is happening, and why it is happening, within the classroom (Wanless et
al., 2012).
School-wide support. As part of its School Theory of Action for Systemic SEL, CASEL
(2013) recommends integrating school-wide policies and activities to foster social, emotional,
and academic learning for all students. Geelong Grammar School, when introducing and
implementing positive education, aimed to remove barriers and provide support school wide to
ensure success. From its inception, Geelong Grammar School’s goal was to infuse the principles
of positive psychology into all areas of the school, from the classroom to interactions between
children and adults (Norrish & Seligman, 2015). This undertaking meant students from the Early
Learning Center to the Senior School, staff, parents, and all employees of the school would be
exposed to and trained in the principles of positive education. It also meant that these principles
would need to be embedded into the curriculum. Support from administration was key, as staff
look to leadership for buy-in. Research on implementation of the RC approach points to the
importance of individualized intervention coaches and principal buy-in (Wanless et al., 2012).
Based on focus groups conducted by researchers, teachers reported that principal buy-in was key,
indicating “that the principal’s judgements about the relevance of the RC approach ― whether

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

41
positive or negative ― was instrumental to their implementation” (Wanless et al., 2012, p.).
Teachers often view administrators as “gatekeepers of change,” and implementation is linked to
administrators’ support, belief, and involvement of interventions (Wanless et al., 2012).
According to focus groups led by a team from the University of Virginia, teachers perceived
buy-in through administrators’ motivation (they are seen as believing in the intervention and are
not just seeking recognition), consistency (school-wide adherence), and accommodation
(dedicated time and resources) (Wanless et al., 2012).
The use of data to improve practices. The final recommendation in CASEL’s School
Theory of Action for Systemic SEL is the use of data to improve readiness (CASEL, 2013). This
recommendations aligns with Kotter’s (1995) advice of planning and creating short-term wins.
Successful implementation of a program or initiative takes time. Kotter (1995) pointed out,
“when it becomes clear to people that major change will take a long time, urgency levels can
drop. Commitments to produce short-term wins help keep the urgency level up and force
detailed analytical thinking that can clarify or revise visions” (p. 7). Examples of data and short-
term wins may include a measure of school climate and teachers’ perceptions, as well as student
social and emotional competence.
Summary
The theory and studies reviewed in this chapter support the notion that both SEL and RC
can effectively support and explicitly teach children to “apply the knowledge, attitudes, and
skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and
show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible
decisions” (CASEL, 2013, p. 4). The shared vision that teaching academic content is of equal
importance as developing social and emotional skills of students is at the core of SEL and RC.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

42
There are multiple benefits to RC, which include a great return on investment and making
classrooms more stimulating, happier, safer, and challenging; however, there are three key
benefits to RC: (1) positive school climate, (2) academic engagement, and (3) fewer discipline
referrals. Schools in the United States and around the world are adopting SEL practices and
programs and RC is currently in use across the United States and some international schools.
Some schools that have implemented SEL and RC are experiencing positive results, whereas
others have less than favorable outcomes. Considerable time and resources are needed in order
to implement RC; therefore, it is critical that we understand the processes involved in doing so.
Temasek American School (TAS) believes that supporting the social and emotional well-
being of its students, including supporting students through major transitions, providing social
and emotional learning (SEL) programs, cultivating a culture of extraordinary care, setting aside
time for advisory programs in the middle and high school divisions, and ensuring that structures
are in place to support pastoral care, is important to the composition of TAS as a learning
institution (TAS Strategic Focus, 2017). Based on research and practice, TAS is certain that the
Responsive Classroom (RC) approach provides the best means to achieve the above stated goals
within its elementary school.
The goal of the TAS counseling and administration team is to create a SEL program that
incorporates RC, the TAS Core Values, character education, and the CASEL Core SEL
Competencies (see figure 1). This goal aligns with the recommendation from the R&D team to
select and implement a SEL approach for the ES based on PERMA. This approach needed to be
tailored to the needs of the TAS community, while also incorporating the existing Core Values
and social skills lessons provided by the ES counseling team.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

43

Figure 1. Temasek American School social emotional learning program.
This study was based on two assumptions: TAS believes that SEL and RC, which fall
under the umbrella of Pastoral Care (one of the TAS five priorities), are of equal importance as
the other four priorities (professional learning communities, standards-based approach, high-
impact instructional strategies, and systems supporting learning) within the TAS 2020 Strategic
Plan, and that TAS is committed to implementing the RC approach in the ES with fidelity. TAS
has invested significant time and resources into selecting the RC approach and the initial stages
of training staff in the RC approach.
Purpose of the Study
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the implementation of RC in an
international school setting so that TAS can effectively and successfully implement RC within

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

44
the elementary school. This study defines effective and successful implementation of the RC
approach as a school-wide understanding of the four domains ― engaging academics, positive
community, developmentally responsive teaching, and effective management ― and its use of
key RC practices and strategies ― interactive modeling, academic choice, morning meetings
and teacher language. The three Rs, i.e., responding to misbehavior with consistency, respect,
and empathy, must used with fidelity. While a comprehensive study would examine all
international schools that have implemented the RC approach, for practical purposes, this study
focused on two international schools which have done so. The following research questions
were used to guide this study:
1. What are some promising practices various international schools have utilized in order to
develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide understanding of the four
domains, and school-wide use of the key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity?
2. What are some barriers experienced by other international schools when implementing
RC?
3. What lessons does the elementary division at TAS need to learn from these two
international schools in order to implement RC with fidelity?

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

45
Chapter Three: Methodology
Using a qualitative approach, the intention of the study was to seek an understanding of
the phenomena of implementing RC in an international school setting so that TAS can
effectively and successfully do so within the elementary school. Qualitative research is a
constructivist approach for exploring and understanding how individuals and groups make
meaning of a situation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015; Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). Qualitative
research can be conducted through interviews, observations, and focus groups. The most
common form of data collection in qualitative research is interviewing (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). Thoughtful and varied questions throughout the interview helped elicit useful data. Data
collection hinged on the relationship between the participants and me, my preparedness, and the
willingness of the participant. Immediate and organized analysis of data was critical in order to
capture useful information.
The following section will begin with a brief overview of the research approach used in
this study. It will then transition into a description on the demographics and characteristics of
participants. After this description, instruments and protocols will be discussed, and there will
be an explanation of the data process. Lastly, this chapter ends with a detailed description of the
data collection process and data analysis.
Rationale for Method of Study
The intention of the study was to seek an understanding of the phenomena of
implementing RC in an international school setting so that TAS can effectively and successfully
implement RC within the elementary school. Qualitative research is a constructivist approach
for exploring and understanding how individuals and groups make meaning of a situation
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015; Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). The foundational belief in

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

46
qualitative research is that there is no single truth, but rather multiple truths (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). According to Merriam and Tisdell, “qualitative researchers are interested in how people
interpret their experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to
their experiences” (2015, p. 15). There are many key characteristics of qualitative research
(Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). These include:
● Researchers are the primary instruments.
● Theories and hypotheses are approached through an inductive lens.
● Rich description, images, texts, and documents aid in learning about the phenomena
● Emergent design.
● Reflexivity: attention is given to the background of the researcher which might create
bias and influence direction of the study.
● Natural setting: data to be collected in field where participants experience the issue.
This study used these key characteristics of qualitative research in order to seek an
understanding of the phenomena of implementing RC in an international school setting so that
TAS can effectively and successfully implement RC within the elementary school.
Participants and Sampling Procedure
Sampling.
Qualitative research uses purposeful, or nonprobability, sampling as the method of
choice (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Purposeful sampling allows the researcher to discover,
understand, and gain an in-depth understanding of the issue at hand. To gain this insight,
qualitative researchers select participants based on a set of predetermined criteria. Merriam and
Tisdell (2015) described this sampling, known as criterion-based selection, as first determining
the crucial attributes of the sample needed for the study and then finding people that meet that

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

47
criteria. The criteria selected for purposeful sampling must be directly linked to the purpose of
the study.
For this study, there were four different categories of participants: elementary school
administrators from Mumbai American School and London American Community Elementary
School; a focus group comprised of Mumbai American School elementary school teachers; two
elementary school administrators from Temasek American School; and one RC consultant who
has worked extensively with international schools. In qualitative research, participants are
selected because they are able to answer research questions, contribute to the researcher’s
understanding of the phenomena, and provide the best data for the study (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). To ensure balanced perspectives, participants were carefully selected,
both males and females with a range of experience in the RC approach.
To identify interview participants, I contacted individuals who have helped their school
or multiple international schools develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide
understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of the key RC practices and strategies
used with fidelity. I also contacted two elementary school administrators at Temasek American
School with the same goals. Five individuals agreed to be interviewed. To identify teachers to
participate in a focus group, I asked the principal of Mumbai American School to contact
individuals. Participants needed to meet the following criteria: (1) the school in which they
were working had a school-wide understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of the
key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity; (2) they had at least one year of experience
using the key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity; (3) they had participated in the
four-day Responsive Classroom Course for Elementary Educators. Six individuals agreed to
participate in the focus group.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

48
Participants were sent individual invitation emails to participate in the study. The email
explained the purpose of the study and asked the administrator, teacher, or consultant to consent
to an interview or focus group. I also asked to observe the RC approach in use at the Mumbai
American School. Predetermined times and dates were provided for each of the interviews,
focus groups, and observations.
Table 3.1
Interview and Focus Group Participants
Instrumentation Role Participant Length of Discussion
Interview

Principal Mumbai American
School
90 minutes
Focus Group Elementary School
Teachers
n = 6
Mumbai American
School
58 minutes
Interview Principal Temasek American
School
55 minutes

Interview

Deputy Principal Temasek American
School
56 minutes

Interview

Consultant Responsive
Classroom
60 minutes
Interview

Principal London American
Community
Elementary School
53 minutes

Instrumentation
Interview protocol.
The instrument used for this study was a semi-structured interview guide, as well as a
semi-structured focus group guide. The most common form of data collection in qualitative
research is interviewing (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Dexter (2006) defined an interview as a
“conversation with a purpose” (p. 136). Interviews are necessary to understand another person’s

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

49
perspective, to learn more about past events, and to find out about things that cannot be directly
observed (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). A semi-structured interview allows the
researcher to respond to the emerging worldview of the respondent while guided by a list of
predetermined more or less structured questions (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
Given the semi-structured format of the interview guide, I allowed for open-ended
questions to be followed up with probes. When conducting interviews, the wording is crucial to
extracting the information desired (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I used a variety
of types of questions throughout the guide and avoided the use of closed-questions, multiple
questions, and leading questions. To develop practice and ensure questions elicited the best data
for this study, I piloted the interview prior to meeting with participants.
Research has shown that a program’s success, as well as the impact on student outcomes,
is undermined by poor implementation and lack of support (CASEL, 2013; Durlak & Dupree,
2008; Durlak et al., 2011; Elias et al., 2006). So how do schools go about implementing SEL
programs and ensuring success? High-quality implementation of SEL programs requires the
following: implementation readiness, initial training and ongoing professional development,
school-wide support, and the use of data to improve practices. The interview guide is divided
into five sections. The first section is comprised of questions to build rapport and gain an
understanding of the participants’ experience with education and SEL. The second section is
comprised of questions which focus on implementation readiness. The third section focuses on
initial training and ongoing professional development, and the fourth section centers on the use
of data to improve practices. The interview guide has been modified for each category of
participants in order to ensure the data collected is the best information needed to understand the
phenomena of implementing the RC approach. The final section consists of an open-ended

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

50
question, asking participants what advice they would give schools that hope to implement the RC
approach. The interview guide and focus group guide can be found in the appendix.
Focus group protocol.
In addition to interviews, I conducted a focus group comprised of Mumbai American
School elementary teachers. A focus group allows the researcher to interview participants in a
group (Creswell, 2014). Like an interview, focus groups provide the researcher an opportunity
to observe body language and facial expressions. Unlike interviews, focus groups allows the
researcher to meet with more people with less of a time commitment. Also, focus group
participants can generate new ideas based on the responses of other members of the group.
Possible limitations include participants being less likely to speak in a group setting, and the
researcher's presence as a facilitator may create bias.
Like interviews, focus groups are necessary to understand another person’s perspective,
to learn more about past events, and to find out about things that cannot be directly observed
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The semi-structured focus guide allowed for open-
ended questions to be followed up with probes. I used a variety of types of questions throughout
the guide and avoided the use of closed-questions, multiple questions, and leading questions. I
did not pilot the focus group guide prior to meeting with participants.
The focus group guide was divided into four sections. The first section focused on
implementation. The second section focused on promising practice, while the third section
focused on barriers. Lastly, the fourth section focused on insights of participants. The interview
guide and focus group guide can be found in the appendices.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

51
Data collection procedure.
Several factors needed to be considered before the interviews and focus group took place,
including location and time. Given that participants were employed at international schools, and
that responses could possibly be influenced by the chosen locations (Weiss, 1994), I tried to
allow participants to choose the location for each interview and focus group. I travelled to
Mumbai to conduct an interview and focus group on the campus of Mumbai American School.
Interviews with the Responsive Classroom consultant and the Temasek American School
administrators took place in Singapore. The interview with the London American Community
Elementary School administrator took place via Skype.
As part of the initial invitation email, I proposed the time needed for each interview and
focus group would be 60 minutes. This suggested time is in keeping with Weiss’ (1994)
guideline of a 30-minute minimum. Interview participants were able to select a time that suited
their schedule so that there was no negative impact to their day. Focus groups participants were
told when and where to meet me by their administrator at Mumbai American School. Before
each interview and focus group, participants were asked to sign a consent form. In addition to
written consent, I asked for verbal consent to record each interview and focus group. I used two
voice-recording devices, an iPhone and a Sony audio recorder. Two devices were used to reduce
the issues of equipment failure.
During interviews and the focus group, I took notes by hand on a printed copy of the
interview protocol and focus group protocol. I hired a transcriber to transcribe each audio file,
without providing the transcriber the names of participants or the name of the school to help
ensure privacy of participants. Audio files were kept in Dropbox and were deleted after data
analysis was completed.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

52
Access/entry.
After successfully completing the preliminary defense, it was determined that this study
qualified for Institutional Review Board (IRB) exemption. Although consent forms were not
required, I obtained a consent form from each participant in order to be mindful of the ethical
practices ensuring that participants were protected from harm and were made sure of their right
to privacy (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). At the beginning of each interview and focus group, I
asked the participants to sign a consent form which detailed the purpose of the study, ensured
privacy of participants, and asked for permission to record the interview or focus group. In
addition to the consent form, I verbally reiterated the purpose of the study, gave assurances to
privacy, and asked for permission to record the interview before beginning each interview and
focus group. All participants signed the consent form and agreed to being recorded.
Credibility and Trustworthiness of Data
The interaction between the interviewer and respondent is crucial to extracting the best
data for the study and creating a positive “conversation with a purpose” (Creswell, 2014;
Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). Three variables that determine the interaction in an
interview are (1) the skill and personality of the interviewer, (2) the interviewer’s attitude and
awareness of the interviewee, and (3) the definition of the situation (Creswell, 2014; Dexter,
2006; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The researcher’s background, experiences,
values, gender, bias, values and history all influence how data is collected and interpreted
(Crewell, 2014). I was aware of my possible bias towards the research topic as I am an
elementary school counselor at the Temasek American School and a member of the RC
implementation team. I brought certain assumptions and biases given my involvement with RC
and work with social emotional learning. I was aware of the importance of being respectful,

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

53
non-judgemental, and non-threatening (Creswell, 2014; Dexter, 2006; Maxwell, 2012; Merriam
& Tisdell, 2015).
Ethical considerations.
I made sure to follow ethical guidelines when conducting interviews and the focus group.
Ethical considerations need to be integrated into every interaction with research participants and
resultant data (Glesne, 2010). As noted previously, I began each data collection by stating the
purpose of the study and the reason that each participant was selected. Participants were told
they were selected because of their experience with Responsive Classroom in international
schools. Participants were told the purpose of the study was to learn more about promising
practices international schools have used to develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach,
school-wide understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of the key RC practices and
strategies used with fidelity. Additionally, I hoped to learn about some barriers experienced by
international schools when implementing the RC approach. The data collected would help
Temasek American School with their implementation of RC approach. Participants were
informed that participation was voluntary, and that they could withdraw at any time. At the end
of each interview and the focus group, a handwritten thank-you card or thank-you email was
given to each participant to show appreciation. In addition, with the exception of London
American Community Elementary School, which was conducted via Skype, all participants were
given a Starbucks gift voucher or bottle of wine as a sign of appreciation. School pseudonyms
were used to ensure privacy, and collected data was stored in passcode protected devices and
files. Participant names were replaced with code names during the transcription process to
ensure anonymity. For example, the Mumbai American School principal who participated in an
interview was coded as IPMAS.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

54
Data analytic strategy
The data collected through interviews and the focus group provided a dense amount of
information. The first step in qualitative data analysis is reading the interview transcripts and
observational notes (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). While the
interviews and the focus group were being transcribed, I listened to each audio file several times
and took notes. Additionally, I read through the handwritten notes taken during each interview
and the focus group. Upon receiving the transcripts from the transcriber, I read over each
interview transcription and the focus group transcription (Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013) once,
and then began to sift through the data during the second reading of transcriptions (Creswell,
2014). This winnowing allowed me to focus on some parts of the data, while paying less
attention to others.
After reading over notes and transcriptions, as well as noting general impressions and
developing tentative ideas, the analysis and coding began. Coding is the process of analyzing
and making meaning from qualitative data. I began the coding process by using a deductive
approach. I looked through the transcriptions for data that related to the research questions,
theories, and literature presented in chapter two. Broad categories began to emerge. During the
next phase of coding, I used an inductive process based on grounded theory. I developed a table,
or matrix (Maxwell, 2013), to help look for recurring phrases, key phrases and/or words that
aligned with the literature. I used open and axial codes to analyze the data (Merriam & Tisdell,
2015). The matrix was divided into four columns to organize the specific lines of transcription,
the participant code, key phrases, and emerging themes. I used selective coding to focus the
identified themes as the data analysis of the units of descriptive data generated categories and

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

55
eventually the emergence of key themes. This process was repeated for all six interview
transcripts and the focus group transcript for emerging categories and themes.
In chapter four, the results of the research will be shared. The major themes that emerged
from the research will be presented and chapter five will summarize the study, as well as offer
conclusions and implications of the study.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

56
Chapter Four: Results
The first three chapters of this study provided an introduction to the problem of practice,
a comprehensive literature review on SEL and the RC approach, and a description of the
methodology by which the data was collected and analyzed. This chapter presents the themes
that emerged from the interviews of administrators and focus group of elementary teachers who
have helped or are in the process of implementing RC across international schools successfully
and with fidelity, as well as a RC consultant who has helped international schools implement RC
with success and fidelity. I will first describe the participants in the study, and then share the
themes that emerged from the qualitative interviews and focus group.
Participants
This qualitative study used a semi-structured interview and focus group approach to
collect data from participants. Three interview participants were located outside of Temasek
American School (TAS), while two were TAS administrators. Six elementary school teachers
from Mumbai American School participated in the focus group. All non-TAS interview
participants, as well as two TAS elementary school administrators, were selected because they
have helped their school, or multiple international schools, develop school-wide buy-in of the
RC approach, school-wide understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of the key
RC practices and strategies used with fidelity. The six focus group participants were selected
because they met the following criteria: (1) the school in which they were working had a
school-wide understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of the key RC practices
and strategies used with fidelity; (2) they had at least one year experience using the key RC
practices and strategies used with fidelity; (3) they had participated in the four day Responsive
Classroom Course for Elementary Educators. An overview of the participants can be seen in

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

57
Table 4.1. Names of participants have been replaced to protect the identities of individuals.
Table 4.1
Overview of Participants
Instrumentation Participant Role Participant School Participant Code
Interview

Principal Mumbai American
School
IPMAS
Focus Group Elementary School
Teachers
n = 6
Mumbai American
School
T1, T2, T3, T4, T5,
T6
Interview Principal Temasek American
School
IPTAS

Interview

Deputy Principal Temasek American
School
IDPTAS

Interview

Trainer Responsive
Classroom
IRCT
Interview

Principal London American
Community
Elementary School
IPLACES

Themes
Overall, analysis of the data pointed to the importance of principal buy-in and
leadership. The schedule played an important role in supporting school-wide implementation,
as well as serving as a barrier. All participants stressed the importance and impact of initial and
ongoing training and supports in order to support the schoolwide implementation of RC.
The following themes emerged from this study:
1. Elementary educators have a shared philosophy which makes RC an easy “sell.” All
participants spoke to the importance of making students feel respected, known, and
connected to part of a classroom and wider school community.
2. Implementation is impacted by the level of administration involvement.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

58
3. Initial and ongoing training helps boost the self-efficacy of staff by strengthening
knowledge and motivation.
4. Structural supports are critical to keeping RC alive and growing. Structures include the
use of faculty meetings, assemblies, parent coffees, peer observations, and
administration observations.
5. The schedule provided the biggest barrier to the implementation of RC. There is a need
to redesign the master schedule to support RC.
6. All participants pointed to the difficulty of adopting RC teacher language. There is a
need to provide structures to support the use of teacher language.
7. International Schools present unique challenges; there is a need for schools to
acknowledge these challenges and personalize RC to reflect each school’s distinctive
culture and setting.
I will now present each theme in relation to the three research questions of this study:
Findings Related to Research Question 1: Promising Practices
Research question one asked What are some promising practices international schools
have used to develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide understanding of the
four domains, and school-wide use of key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity?
Obtaining the answer to that question was intended to increase understanding of the specific
steps and strategies international schools have used to implement RC and keep it both alive and
growing within their schools. High-quality implementation and support are needed to ensure
the success of evidence-based SEL programs (CASEL, 2013; Durlak et al., 2011). Research has
shown that a program’s success, as well as the impact on student outcomes, can be undermined
by poor implementation and lack of support (CASEL, 2013; Durlak & Dupree, 2008; Durlak et

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

59
al., 2011; Elias et al., 2006). So how do schools go about implementing SEL programs and
ensuring success? High-quality implementation of SEL programs requires the following:
implementation readiness, initial training and ongoing professional development, school-wide
support, and the use of data to improve practices. Research on implementation of the RC
approach point to the importance of individualized intervention coaches and principal buy-in
(Wanless et al., 2012).
Four themes emerged from the first research question, which related to promising
practices. These themes are:
● Elementary educators have a shared philosophy which makes RC an easy “sell.” All
participants spoke to the importance of making students feel respected, known, and
connected to part of a classroom and wider school community.
● Implementation is impacted by the level of administration involvement.
● Initial and ongoing training helps boost self-efficacy of staff by strengthening
knowledge and motivation.
● Structural supports are critical in keeping RC alive and growing. Structures include the
use of faculty meetings, assemblies, parent coffees, peer observations, and
administration observations.
Having a shared philosophy.
All participants involved in this study held a shared philosophy about the important role
elementary educators play in making students feel cared for and connected, in addition to
recognizing that academic development is of equal importance to social and emotional
development. Research has found that “emotions can facilitate or impede children’s academic
engagement, work ethic, commitment, and ultimate school success” (Durlak et al., 2011, p.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

60
405). All participants were in agreement that positive relationships built on respect were the
key to student success.
IPLACES stated that “we are all here to make every single kid feel connected and part
of a community and included in something that is meaningful and fun.” IPLACES further
added that people who didn’t share that same philosophy should “probably need to be teaching
in another division or another place.” IPMAS also agreed that elementary educators focus on
teaching the child, and not just teaching the curriculum, while IPLACES observed that “there is
always a strength in elementary school teachers about the importance of self-esteem, of self-
worth, of the connections amongst the kids in your class and the connections you have with the
child as well.” T1 shared that “my goal is to provide an environment where kids feel safe and
respected.”
A fundamental belief at TAS has been the idea of “extraordinary care.” The school has
built a culture based on the belief that every student should be known and advocated for.
IPTAS noted that “our focus has always been on the welfare of kids, and we talk about the
extraordinary care of kids. This started way before our concentration on social emotional
learning.” IDPTAS added “there was a notion of extraordinary care here for a long time. The
adoption of Core Values and the notion that you know when you work with young children,
they have to feel safe, accepted, and known.”
Considering readiness, or what is sometimes referred to as capacity, before
implementing a new program or intervention is an essential first step in implementation
(CASEL, 2013; Elias & Weissberg, 2000; Meyers et al., 2012; Wanless & Domitrovich, 2015).
This shared philosophy amongst all participants provided a solid foundation and readiness for
the introduction of SEL and RC.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

61
Administration Involvement
Based on focus groups conducted by researchers from the University of Virginia,
teachers reported that principal buy-in was key (Wanless et al., 2012). Feedback during focus
groups found that “teachers indicated that the principal’s judgements about the relevance of the
RC approach - whether positive or negative - was instrumental to their implementation”
(Wanless et al., 2012). Teachers often view administrators as “gatekeepers of change,” and
implementation is linked to administrators’ support, belief, and involvement of interventions
(Wanless et al., 2012).
IRCT took part in the University of Virginia study on RC as both a teacher and RC
consultant. She stressed the importance of principal buy-in, saying that administrators need to
“show up, do the training yourselves.” In both MAS and LACES, the administrators brought
RC to their schools and “sold it” to their staff. After attending an off-site training, IPLACES
“came back determined to get our staff to buy into this.” As well as selling RC to their staff,
both administrators attended the training. IPLACES shared, “we went to the staff meetings, we
were involved in the training as much as everybody else. I think that was a key message in
terms of communicating this is for everyone.” IPMAS noted that their RC trainer observed that
most principals do not always attend the trainings. IPMAS shared “we got to the end and she
said that doesn’t happen in other schools we go to. Yeah, you pop in but you don’t come for all
four days and you don’t engage. You did the course. You didn’t have to.” IPMAS felt that
attending the course communicated “such a good message” to staff.
Teachers at MAS agreed that principal buy-in was key to their buy-in of RC. T3 shared
“it helps that administration models and agrees and buys into it as well.” T5 observed that the
MAS principal had not had RC training initially, but now he “is quite the champion for it.” T2

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

62
liked that the MAS administrators were growing alongside everyone else and “they are learners
as well.” All of the teachers noted that administrators use RC language with staff. T4 shared
“maybe they try but it just seems very natural that the language is embedded in everyday,
informal chats or emails or a formal meeting.”
TAS administrators also attended the initial four-day training and believed that this will
help support teachers. IPTAS shared “if we expect them to do it then we have to understand it,
know it, and be able to help them and support them with it.”
Training.
High-quality implementation increases the effectiveness of well-designed programs and
is enhanced through training. According to CASEL research, “teachers who receive an initial
training to support a particular program are more likely to teach all of the lessons in that
particular program. They will use the methods prescribed by the program more effectively than
teachers who do not receive training” (CASEL, 2013, p. 16). As part of its School Theory of
Action for Systemic SEL, CASEL recommends providing initial training and ongoing
professional development (CASEL, 2013). The RC approach provides an initial four-day
training to participants. In addition, the RC approach has a plethora of materials (e.g., books,
monthly newsletters, workshops, videos), and provides ongoing professional development
through follow-up training (Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2007). All participants in this study
remarked that the training and resources RC provides in critical in the successful
implementation of RC.
Initial training. Knowledge and training are crucial to successful implementation. As
Clark and Estes (2008) explained, “Improving human performance is the highest leverage
activity available to a company” (p. 4). The initial four-day training provides an overview of

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

63
the RC philosophy, components, and strategies. Participants take part in morning meetings,
energizers, and work together in small groups through a variety of learning structures. IRCT
believes that this initial training provides capacity building and supports teachers, noting that
“we can’t expect teachers to do things that they are not trained on.” Participants remarked on
the sense of community which was built during the training. T6 shared “one of the biggest
things initially was that they trained everybody, which was a huge commitment, but it made it
such a powerful key.” Participants also noted that the training provided practical strategies that
could immediately be used in classrooms; as IDPTAS observed, “you walked away with things
people could use right away.” T2 remarked that “you went away saying, oh I already do this
and I can do that a little bit different to make my teaching better.” T5 shared that, after the
training, “I was ready to go back and start it immediately. The kids loved it.” In addition to
practical strategies staff could immediately utilize, IPTAS hoped that his staff “would walk
away with a new actual understanding of social emotional learning.”
Importance of relationship with trainer. Both MAS and LACES commented on the
importance of the role of RC trainer. IPLACES noted “you have to have a really good
presenter.” T2 added that the trainer “was the best buy-in honestly; she is just phenomenal.”
Researchers have found that relationships which are cooperative, supportive, and operate with
open communication are deemed ideal relationships between coaches and teachers (Wanless et
al., 2012).
Ongoing training. MAS, LACES, and TAS have an ongoing relationship with one RC
trainer who provides the initial four-day training, advanced training, special topic one-day
workshops, as well as coaching days to work with teachers, PLCs, and administrators and
counselors. Researchers from the University of Virginia found that a psychologically safe

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

64
environment is an important ingredient when implementing RC. Such an environment is
described as one that allows teachers to work at their own pace, is socially supportive, and one
in which administrators and peers understood what is happening, and why it is happening,
within the classroom (Wanless et al., 2012). T4 remarked that both the initial and ongoing
training helped staff realize, “it is not always going to be perfect, and just accepting it and being
like okay.” IPMAS encourages staff to be open to learning and accepting that it is never going
to be perfect, but it can always look better. Supporting each other in using RC strategies and
teacher language, IPMAS notes, “it is safe, pretty low stakes.”
Resources. RC offers a variety of resources, including a monthly newsletter,
conferences, a website with links to research and articles, videos, and books. Clark and Estes
(2008) stated that information and job aids are needed when people do not know how, or need
reminders, to accomplish their performance goals. Teachers at MAS remarked that the books
were an easy-to-use resource, and they turned to them as a reminder and refresher of the RC
components, strategies and language. T6 shared that the books are “a good way to kind of
remind you,” while T2 said, “I often will review the books over the summer.” MAS provides
RC a kit of resource books for every grade level. T5 noted that “I struggle getting into
educational books, but those I will grab.” T3 shared that the books are “easy to follow, easy to
navigate, easily set up. They are a great resource.” IPLACES remembered that, in the
beginning of implementation, “we were doing book studies in staff meetings and modelling
lessons,” while IPMAS shared that “we bought mountains of materials and spent thousands of
dollars on the materials.”
Keeping it alive.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

65
Kotter (1995) pointed out, “when it becomes clear to people that major change will take
a long time, urgency levels can drop. Commitments to produce short-term wins help keep the
urgency level up and force detailed analytical thinking that can clarify or revise visions” (p. 7).
In addition to creating short-term wins, MAS and LACES reiterated the vision through a
multitude of venues. Kotter (2012) noted that communication of vision be repeated often, be
shared through multiple forums, and be modeled by leadership (p. 92). IMAS worked with his
team to brainstorm ideas on how to keep RC alive. The team came to the consensus that
“basically the best method of keeping it alive has been to revisit on a regular basis, as it is with
everything.” IRCT believes “if we want to keep it alive, we have to have regular structures that
keep it alive.” These structures include faculty meetings, assemblies, parent communication,
peer observation, and administrator feedback.
Faculty meetings. Faculty meetings allow faculty to come together and hear the same
message. IRCT thinks that “they are the key, they are the way of keeping it alive.” Faculty
meetings at MAS and LACES are run using the morning meeting structure. T5 remarked that a
greeting, sharing news, participating in an energizer and reading a morning message “keeps it
alive.” In addition to a message, share, and energizer, IPMAS tries to use the RC language “in a
fun way” as a “reminder of what we are here for.” IPLACES also used the morning meeting
format during faculty meetings. In addition to the morning meeting format, LACES faculty also
participated in book studies and modelled lessons during faculty meetings. Although in the
early stages of RC implementation, faculty meetings at TAS have also used RC greetings,
energizers and ways of sharing. Several TAS faculty meetings have been dedicated solely to
RC in which SEL leads guide faculty towards use of common teacher language and building
stronger relationships with students.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

66
Assemblies. MAS and LACES also use the morning meeting format with school-wide
assemblies. IPMAS explains “we start all our assemblies with a message that is read out by our
5th graders.” LACES students participate in a monthly school-wide assembly involving 300
students, which is run using an RC format.
Parent communication. TAS, LACES, and MAS use a variety of ways to communicate
the RC approach to parents, such as parent coffees, Open House, emails, and assemblies. IMAS
explained “we have intentionally gone out of our way to let our community know about
morning meeting, about Responsive Classroom, about growth mindset.” MAS’s parents take
part in a morning meeting in their child’s classroom during Open House. The goal is for parents
to understand how this opening to their child’s day sets them up for success. The parents of
LACES students are invited “to be a part of morning meeting quite frequently” in their child’s
classroom. as well as the school-wide assemblies. TAS uses parent coffees to update them on
RC, SEL, and the Strategic Plan.
Peer observations. According to Mayer (2011), learning is a change in knowledge
which is directly credited to experience. MAS believes that some of the best learning can take
place by observing peers applying the RC components within their classrooms. Although
challenging to organize, small groups of teachers from several grade levels, as well as
administration, would observe teachers. Each observation had a specific focus such as teacher
language or morning meetings. All focus group participants spoke to the positive impact peer
observations played in celebrating success and sharpening practice. Teachers were able to see
that RC “really is living through our school.” T4 reflected that the initial observation was a bit
“intimidating” at first. However, T3 and the other teachers found that “zooming in” on teacher
language or morning meetings is “important.” T2 shared that the observations weren’t

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

67
evaluative and that “it was my first time going into somebody else’s classroom.” IPMAS said
that the observations “were pretty low stakes” and a way for teachers to observe how RC works
across all grade levels. For example, “holy cow, kindergartners can do what I’m struggling with
my fourth graders to do.” Observations were shared at meetings in order to “celebrate success
in public ways.”
Administrator feedback. In addition to peer observations, administrators at MAS and
LACES make a point of going into classrooms to support teachers with RC and to provide
feedback. Social Cognitive Theory states that by providing examples or models of to-be-
learned strategies, learning improves; in addition, feedback that is private, specific, and timely
will elevate performance as well (Denler, Wolters, & Benzon, 2006). IPMAS believes the job
of the school leader is to give feedback and “build people’s confidence.” IPMAS goes into
classrooms, observes, and asks teachers “how are you doing with the language? What might be
some improvements that you can be thinking about?” IPLACES spends a great deal of “time
and energy” observing and using “a lot of the assessment tools in the Responsive Classroom
program to give teachers specific feedback.” The feedback consists of “here is what I noticed
you were doing that looked like Responsive Classroom behavior, and here is what I noticed
might be better.”

Findings Related to Research Question 2: Barriers
Research question two asked: What are some barriers experienced by international
schools when implementing RC that hinder school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide
understanding of the four domains, and school-wide use of key RC practices and strategies used
with fidelity? This question was intended to increase understanding of the barriers that are

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

68
specific to international schools when implementing RC. Even when people are knowledgeable
and highly motivated, there is another barrier that stands in the way of achieving performance
goals ― the organization itself ― and organizations are made up of a myriad of features.
Rueda (2011) described organizational features that impede performance goals as being “how
the structure is organized, the policies and practices that define it, and even how people interact
with each other in the setting” (p. 52). These features can create obstacles to achieving high-
quality implementation and support of evidence-based SEL programs. Two themes emerged
from the second research question:
● The schedule provided the biggest barrier to the implementation of RC. There is a need
to redesign the master schedule to support RC.
● All participants pointed to the difficulty of adopting RC teacher language. There is a
need to provide structures to support the use of teacher language.
Schedule.
Morning meeting. Carving out dedicated time in the schedule for morning meeting and
closing circle is a barrier all four administrators faced. Although challenging, IRCT believes
that a change in schedule “is an important message that this is what we are doing.” IRCT
further explained “the success of the schools that I know have across the board 15 to 20
minutes, everybody is in morning meeting.” Both IPMAS and IPLACES described how
challenging it was to block off time in the morning and not have it impact special area teachers.
IPMAS tried specials first thing in the morning for older students. Although “not perfect,”
IPMAS explained “not every day but some days, they come back and have their morning
meeting at 8:45 or whatever time they come back.” IPLACES shared that “we had a few

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

69
teachers, special area teachers, who gave pushback” when they were told “I’m going to take 30
minutes of your planning time and you are going to be in a teacher’s classroom.”
TAS administrators have not reworked the schedule to allow for morning meeting; they
are cautious about doing so due to a proposed new campus. As IPTAS explained, “we don’t
[want to] implement a new schedule now and then we open a new school and we have to
implement another new schedule.” Both IPTAS and IDPTAS believe that teachers will carve
out time to conduct morning meetings, regardless of a schedule change. IPTAS explained that
some “people have jumped ahead if they felt like they had time for the morning meeting.” T5
shared that it can be difficult to run a morning meeting without dedicated time in the schedule,
and, in fact, had dropped morning meetings at her previous school because it was “purely a
schedule thing.” T2 further explained that “people are not going to successfully do it if there is
not that space in the schedule for them to do it.”
Peer observations. Through peer observations, administrators try to encourage their
teachers to push themselves into their Zones of Proximal Development (ZPD; Chaiklin, 2003)
as they experiment with RC in a “safe” environment, allowing for mistakes and experimentation
with RC structures and strategies within their classrooms. Both MAS and LACES found it
“challenging” to find time within their schedules for peer observations. IPLACES shared “there
is time built into the schedule for teachers to team teach or see each other teach or go into each
other’s classrooms.” IPMAS worked hard to include a cross-section of the school for each peer
observation. For example, a 2nd grade teacher, a 4th grade teacher, and a teaching assistant
would observe a 1st grade and 5th grade classroom. IPMAS shared that “we got together and it
was a nightmare to organize as you can well imagine,” but conceded that peer observations have
had a “big impact” on faculty understanding and use of RC.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

70
Teacher language. Teacher language is a significant component of RC, and teachers
need support with learning the three types of language (reinforcing, reminding, redirecting). All
focus group members remarked that teacher language is the most difficult component of RC. T6
shared “sometimes you hit a roadblock” and “you always have to be reminding yourself because
it is so easy” to slip into “great job” and “I like how” language. Both MAS and LACES focused
on teacher language during faculty meetings, peer and administration observations, and book
clubs. LACES faculty read Paula Denton’s book, The Power of Our Words: Teacher Language
That Helps Children Learn and shared what was learned during faculty meetings. The Social
Cognitive Theory states that it is important to rehearse modeled behavior after observational
learning (Kirschner, Kirschner, & Paas, 2006). IPLACES uses RC assessment tools to give a
“consistent label for what we were doing and giving each other feedback with peer coaches.”
According to the Information Processing Theory, to develop mastery, individuals must acquire
component skills, practice integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned.
This will help transfer learning from working memory to long-term memory (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). IPMAS shared that “we talk about reminding, redirecting, and reinforcing
language a lot,” while keeping it “safe” and “pretty low stakes.” IPMAS encourages his staff to
find humor through the learning process, observing that “we can all laugh about that and we all
know how hard it is to change the language of a lifetime.”
Findings Related to Research Question 3: Lessons
Research question 3 asked What lessons does the elementary division at TAS need to
learn from international schools in order to implement RC with fidelity? That question was
intended to increase understanding of what other international schools have learned through
implementation of RC. TAS has invested significant time and resources into selecting the RC

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

71
approach and the initial stages of training staff in the RC. What lessons can be learned from
other international schools and how can TAS apply this knowledge so that it can effectively and
successfully implement RC within the elementary school? A theme that emerged from the third
research question, which was related to lesson, was:
● International Schools present unique challenges. There is a need for schools to
acknowledge these challenges and personalize RC to reflect each school’s
distinctive culture and setting.
Transient populations
Due to the nature of international schools, there is a high turnover of both students and
teachers. International schools also bring a different approach to teaching and learning as
teachers and students are coming from around the world. Consistency and classroom community
are key components to successful international schools and were mentioned by all participants in
the study.
Consistency. IPMAS selected RC to “bring us together,” observing that “we were a bit
all over the map, so providing some common language for kids was really important.” IPMAS
also noted that “we knew it was a good program to bring. We felt confident it was going to
make a difference and align our language and expectations.” MAS teachers agreed, and all
mentioned that consistency was a big reason for both the need and success of RC. T4 shared,
“we are quite a transient population, both students and teachers. But as far as teachers, it is a
way to put us all on the same platform for a common language.” MAS teachers observed that
the consistency helped align specialist teachers to classroom teachers, and it helped with
transitions throughout the day. As T2 observed, “we are all aware of the expectations while

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

72
transitioning, and the students are modeled the same routines. This happens on the playground
also.”
Classroom community. Both administrators from MAS and LACES stressed the
importance of building classroom community for international school students. IPLACES
shared, “Kids were coming from all over the world, and they were staying for a long time or
short time. It was really important that kids get to know each other quickly and have that sense
of community.” IPMAS echoed these sentiments and stressed the importance of classroom
community in a school where “you have got 25% of your class might be new each year.” RC
helped MAS support students as they transition in and transition out. IPMAS noted that
teachers were able to build classroom community much more quickly through the use of
morning meetings and other RC strategies. MAS teachers shared the speed and ease they were
able to build classroom community and bring new students into the fold through the consistency
and structure RC provides. T3 said that “for new ones, at the end of the week they have been
here for five days and they feel safe in the structure we have.”
Personalization
As stated earlier in the report, all participants involved in this study held a shared
philosophy about the important role elementary educators play in making students feel cared for
and connected. They recognized that academic development is of equal importance to social
and emotional development. IPMAS found that, when implementing RC, “we already had the
capacity in that we had good people who were already committed and recognized the need for
social emotional.” Both MAS and LACES have incorporated RC into their schools’ pre-existing
SEL structures; for example, growth mindset is a focus for MAS. This is communicated at
parent coffees and during faculty meetings. LACES has a program titled “People Skills” which

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

73
is run by their elementary counselor. Each school has a set of Core Values and Learning Results
which focus on personal and interpersonal characteristics.
Like MAS and LACES, TAS wants to incorporate RC into its already established SEL
culture. IDPTAS knows that RC is not a “stand alone,” as “we have our Core Values and we
have things that matter to us in terms of how we build that feeling of extraordinary care here.”
RC is meant to amplify what is already in place and allow SEL to spread widely among all
stakeholders. TAS has a counselor attached to each grade level and, much like LACES’ “People
Skills” class, teach an explicit lesson on social emotional skills and the Core Values in every
classroom on a 12-day rotation. The goal of the TAS counseling and administration team is to
create a SEL program that incorporates RC, the TAS Core Values, character education, and the
CASEL Core SEL Competencies (see figure 4.1). This goal aligns with the recommendation
from the R&D team to select and implement a SEL approach for the ES based on PERMA. This
approach needed to be tailored to the needs of the TAS community, while also incorporating the
existing Core Values and social skills lessons provided by the ES counseling team.
Conclusion
The qualitative data collected from the interview responses and focus group responses
revealed much about some promising practices international schools have used to successfully
implement RC, as well as some barriers experienced by those schools during that process. The
data also highlighted some unique advantages and disadvantages of international schools, which
can be helpful to keep in mind as TAS continues its implementation of RC.
The first finding from the research related to promising practices reveals that RC is easy
to “sell” when faculty have a shared philosophy. All participants spoke to the importance of
making students feel respected, known, and connected to part of a classroom and wider school

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

74
community. RC is not a program; rather, it is an approach to social emotional learning. Hence,
schools have successfully implemented RC by incorporating it into the social emotional fabric
already existing and personalizing it to reflect their school’s culture.
The second finding related to promising practices, and perhaps the most significant to
emerge from the data, is the important role administration plays in motivating staff. Referred to
as “principal buy-in” throughout the study, implementation is impacted by the level of
administration involvement. Researchers found that “teachers indicated that the principal’s
judgements about the relevance of the RC approach ― whether positive or negative ― was
instrumental to their implementation” (Wanless et al., 2012).
The third finding from the research related to promising practices reveals the need for
initial and ongoing training. Initial training involves the four-day course for elementary
teachers, while ongoing training is comprised of the four-day advance course for elementary
teachers, special topic one-day workshops, peer observations, and providing access to resources.
The fourth finding related to promising practices revealed the importance of creating
structures to keep RC alive and growing throughout the school. The data revealed that there are
a variety of structures that allow RC to remain viable, including the use of faculty meetings,
assemblies, parent coffees, peer observations, and administration observations. Consistent and
repeated communication, coupled with celebrating small wins, helped to ensure RC was never
off the radar and was viewed as a critical and necessary thread in the fabric of the school.
The data revealed several barriers that international schools faced when implementing
RC. The biggest challenge international schools faced was the schedule. Carving out dedicated
time at the start of the day for morning meeting, as well as dedicated time at the end of the day
for closing circle, proved challenging. Administrators needed to think creatively, call on special

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

75
area teachers to be flexible, and establish “must dos” in order to overcome this obstacle.
Carving out time for peer observations within the schedule proved to be difficult as well.
Another barrier the data revealed was learning and applying teacher language. Teacher
language, a key component of RC, includes reinforcing, reminding, and redirecting language.
Special attention and focus needed to be paid to teacher language to begin to embed it into daily
practice. Schools focused on teacher language through book studies, one-day special topic
workshops and peer observations, and through administrations’ use of language through email,
faculty meetings, and feedback.
The data uncovered several lessons for TAS as it continues to implement RC. TAS is a
large institution with complex organizational structures, as well as being a highly successful and
respected school that prides itself on innovation and excellence. Given this culture, the school
is plagued with a history of initiative overload. The first lesson the data revealed is the
importance of making RC a priority. A question of whether this overload was a “self-imposed”
problem emerged through the data. One way international schools have navigated this obstacle
is through principal buy-in; international school principals who make RC a priority are able to
achieve successful implementation within two years.
Another lesson for TAS is the need to acknowledge the unique challenges international
schools face, which include high teacher turnover and a transient student population. An option
to combat this is through building consistency throughout the school and developing classroom
community quickly to support new students.
The last lesson the data revealed is the importance of schools to personalize RC to
reflect each school’s unique culture and setting. The international schools from this study have
incorporated the RC components and used them to compliment and magnify what was already

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

76
in place with SEL. For example, teacher language and the Core Values help to reinforce the
schoolwide rules. Explicit SEL lessons provided by the grade level counselor build reiterate
and expand discussions during morning meeting. Each school recognized that RC is an
approach and not a program.
In chapter five there will be a summary of themes., implications for practice and
recommendations for future research.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

77
Chapter Five: Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the success and challenges of implementing
Responsive Classroom (RC) in an international school setting so that Temasek American School
(TAS) can effectively and successfully implement RC within the elementary school. This paper
defines effective and successful implementation of the RC approach as a school-wide
understanding of the four domains ― engaging academics, positive community, developmentally
responsive teaching, and effective management- and the school-wide use of key RC practices
and strategies ― interactive modeling, academic choice, morning meetings, teacher language:
the three Rs, and responding to misbehavior with consistency, respect, and empathy, all used
with fidelity. Fidelity refers to the use of interventions in the manner in which they were
designed (Wanless et al., 2012). While a comprehensive study would include all international
schools that have implemented the RC approach, for practical purposes, this study focused on
two international schools who have successfully implemented the RC approach within their
elementary schools. The following research questions were used to guide this study:
1. What are some promising practices international schools have used to develop school-
wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide understanding of the four domains, and
school-wide use of key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity?
2. What are some barriers experienced by international schools when implementing RC that
hinder school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, school-wide understanding of the four
domains, and school-wide use of key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity?
3. What lessons does the elementary division at TAS need to learn from international
schools in order to implement RC with fidelity?

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

78
This study used a qualitative approach; its intention was to seek an understanding of the
phenomena of implementing RC in an international school setting so that TAS can effectively
and successfully implement RC within the elementary school. Qualitative research is a
constructivist approach for exploring and understanding how individuals and groups make
meaning of a situation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015; Creswell, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). Individual
interviews were conducted with four international school administrators. The international
schools were Mumbai American School, London American Community Elementary School, and
Temasek American School. An individual interview was conducted with a Responsive
Classroom consultant. A focus group consisting of six elementary school teachers from Mumbai
American School was also conducted. The interviews and focus group were then transcribed and
coded using both a deductive and inductive process. As this process proceeded, the use of
selective coding helped to reveal the identified themes as the data analysis of the units of
descriptive data generated categories and eventually the emergence of key themes.
Summary of Findings
An analysis of the qualitative data from the interviews and focus group revealed
promising practices international elementary schools have used when implementing RC. In
addition, the qualitative data provided an understanding of the barriers international elementary
schools experienced when implementing RC. From the data analysis, seven findings emerged
regarding the implementation of RC within international elementary schools. These findings are:
1. Elementary educators have a common philosophy that positive relationships built on
respect were the key to student success. This mutual philosophy serves as a necessary
foundation for a shared SEL vision for all stakeholders, a vision that includes social,
emotional, and academic success for all students.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

79
2. Perceived principal buy-in of RC is critical to successful implementation.
Implementation can be led by administration, or by a guiding coalition, but staff must
view the principal as fully engaged and supportive of RC.
3. Initial and ongoing professional development is needed to provide support necessary to
enact change in instruction, and to build internal capacity to provide SEL-related
professional development to staff.
4. The challenge for leadership is to remove barriers and provide school-wide support to
ensure success.
5. Teachers feel supported and are open to applying new RC learning in a psychologically
safe environment.
6. RC is integrated into established SEL programs already existing within the school with
the goal of creating coherence and a seamless integration into the school’s culture.
7. The size of the school, as well as the number of its initiatives, is a significant issue to be
addressed in order to develop and sustain successful implementation of RC.
8. A follow-up observation revealed that, although research points to the use of data to
improve effectiveness, data may not be needed or may need to be redefined when
implementing RC within international schools.
The first finding demonstrates that there is a common belief among teachers and
administrators of the importance for SEL. This finding is important because it aligns with
CASEL’s School Theory for Action for Systemic SEL (2013) in which the first recommendation
for SEL programming and implementation is establishing a shared SEL vision with all
stakeholders. Considering readiness, or what is sometimes referred to as capacity, before
implementing a new program or intervention is an essential first step in implementation

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

80
(CASEL, 2013; Elias & Weissberg, 2000; Meyers et al., 2012; Wanless & Domitrovich, 2015).
This shared philosophy amongst participants in the study provided a solid foundation and
readiness for the introduction of SEL and RC. For TAS, this common understanding and belief
among teachers and administrators supports the school’s conviction that sustaining the social and
emotional well-being of its students is important to the composition of TAS as a learning
institution. Pastoral Care, or SEL, is one of the top five priorities in the TAS Strategic plan.
The second finding asserts that perceived principal buy-in is critical when implementing
RC. This finding is significant because it brings to light the important role leadership plays
during implementation, especially its early stages. This finding supports the research out of the
University of Virginia on RC, which found that “teachers indicated that the principal’s
judgements about the relevance of the RC approach ― whether positive or negative ― was
instrumental to their implementation” (Wanless et al., 2012). RC implementation at MAS and
LACES was led by administration. Data from the focus group highlighted the important role the
principal played, and continues to play, in bringing RC to MAS and keeping it alive. RC
implementation at TAS is being led by the SEL Committee, which consists of the six ES school
counselors and a deputy principal. Efforts need to be directed to address the staff’s perceived
buy-in of TAS administrators.
The third finding highlights the importance of training. Initial and ongoing professional
development is needed to provide support necessary to enact change in instruction, and to build
internal capacity to provide SEL-related professional development to staff. This finding aligns
with CASEL’s School Theory for Action for Systemic SEL (2013), in which the third
recommendation for SEL programming and implementation is to provide ongoing professional
development. Research has found that, although initial training is important, ongoing training

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

81
and support strengthens both the quality of teaching and student performance (CASEL, 2013;
Domitrovich et al., 2011; Rimm-Kauffman, Wanless, Patton, & Deutsch, 2011). MAS, LACES,
and TAS have offered the initial four-day training to its teachers, as well as the four-day advance
course for elementary educators. All three schools have developed an ongoing relationship with
a RC consultant, and provide a variety of RC resources and ongoing professional development
opportunities.
The fourth finding emphasizes the removal of barriers and providing support school-wide
to ensure success. Data from the study revealed that every administrator faced challenges around
reworking the schedule and providing structures to ensure school-wide support of RC. Research
has found (Elenkov & Manev, 2005) that administrators are able to influence internal changes
within their schools by setting up structures and processes to support innovation. Both MAS and
LACES reworked their schedule in order to support teachers with morning meeting and closing
circle. In addition to removing barriers, the data revealed the importance of creating structures to
keep RC alive and growing throughout the school. and that there are a variety of structures
available to do so. These include the use of faculty meetings, assemblies, parent coffees, peer
observations, and administration observations. Consistent and repeated communication, coupled
with celebrating small wins, helped to ensure RC was never off the radar and was viewed as a
critical and necessary thread in the fabric of the school. Without a clear plan for a new schedule
and creating structures to keep RC alive, TAS will struggle to fully implement RC with fidelity.
The fifth finding draws attention to the need for a psychologically safe environment.
Implementation is deemed successful when teachers have access to individualized coaching and
are provided with a psychologically safe context; researchers have found that relationships which
are cooperative, supportive, and operate with open communication are deemed ideal

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

82
relationships between coaches and teachers (Wanless et al., 2012). A psychologically safe
environment is described as one that allows teachers to work at their own pace, is socially
supportive, one in which administrators and peers understood what is happening, and why it is
happening, within the classroom (Wanless et al., 2012). TAS has a culture of professional
excellence and student academic achievement, which, ironically, may inhibit teachers from being
open to experimentation and having open conversations about what is challenging when trying
out RC components and strategies. Both MAS and LACES have created a culture of “humour”
and “low-stakes” so that staff can grow together in its use of RC in a psychologically safe
environment. TAS will need to look for ways to create a similar environment.
The sixth finding emphasizes that RC is an approach and not a program. The data
revealed the importance of personalizing RC to reflect each school’s unique culture and setting.
The international schools from this study have incorporated the RC components into each school
and used them to compliment and magnify what was already in place with SEL. For example,
teacher language and the Core Values help to reinforce the schoolwide rules. Explicit SEL
lessons provided by the grade level counselor build reiterate and expand discussions during
morning meeting. This aligns with CASEL’s School Theory for Action for Systemic SEL
(2013), in which the sixth recommendation for SEL programming and implementation is to
provide ongoing professional development. CASEL (2013) recommends clarifying how SEL
relates to other aspects of the school “with the goal of creating seamless integration, coherence,
and efficiency” (n.p.). Based on this recommendation, the goal of the TAS counseling and
administration team is to create a SEL program that incorporates RC, the TAS Core Values,
character education, and the CASEL Core SEL Competencies. This goal aligns with the

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

83
recommendation from the R&D team to select and implement a SEL approach for the ES based
on PERMA.
The seventh finding asserts that the size of the school, as well as the number of its
initiatives, are significant issues to be addressed in order to develop and sustain successful
implementation of RC. This finding is significant because it highlights the challenges large
institutions face when attempting to implement to scale. TAS has 1,643 elementary students.
MAS has 380 elementary students, whereas LACES has 250. Given the sheer size of student and
teacher populations, TAS is faced with logistical challenges that many international elementary
schools do not experience. In addition to population size, TAS staff are struggling under the
quantity of new initiatives. Douglas Reeves (2016) purported that when there is a focus on
everything, there really is no focus. Both MAS and LACES made RC a priority. Although SEL
is part of the TAS 2020 Strategic Plan, there are many initiatives competing with RC for
prioritization. TAS administrators are supportive of RC, but they are spread thin trying to
support all of the initiatives within the elementary school, as well as designing the new campus.
The eighth finding challenges the idea of using data when implementing SEL programs.
This finding came about after reading through the transcripts and coding the data. Although
CASEL’s School Theory of Action for Systemic SEL recommends the use of data to improve
readiness (CASEL, 2013), this study found that participants in this study did not use data to
gauge implementation success. Both MAS and LACES used short-term wins to boost urgency
and morale throughout their school’s implementation of RC. However, no participants in this
study used data to measure school climate and teachers’ perceptions, as well as student social
and emotional competence. All administrators, as well as the RC consultant, talked about being
able to walk into a school and “feel” the effects of RC. They all acknowledged that quantifying

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

84
feelings was difficult and were unsure of how best to do this, but they reflected that the use of
data is a possible area of future exploration.
Implications for Practice
This study was based on two assumptions: TAS believes that SEL and RC, which fall
under the umbrella of Pastoral Care (one of the TAS five priorities), are of equal importance as
the other four priorities (professional learning communities, standards-based approach, high-
impact instructional strategies, and systems supporting learning) within the TAS 2020 Strategic
Plan, and TAS is committed to implementing the RC approach in the ES with fidelity. The
purpose of this study was to examine the implementation of RC in an international school setting
so that TAS can effectively and successfully do so within the elementary school. TAS has
invested significant time and resources into selecting the RC approach and the initial stages of
training staff in the RC approach. Therefore, in order to continue and to improve
implementation of RC, TAS should take note of the implications drawn from this study’s
research and findings, i.e., continue to communicate the vision and short-term wins; increase
perceived principal buy-in; create structures so that RC can be implemented with fidelity and
continue to grow; establish action steps necessary to prioritizing “must dos;” and grow internal
capacity.
Communication and short-term wins.
The first implication acknowledges the importance of communication. TAS has begun
implementing RC, but faced with annual teacher turnover and competing initiatives, revisiting
the purpose of RC is both important and necessary. The TAS 2020 Strategic Plan is
communicated on the school website, but a plan to clearly communicate with all TAS
stakeholders will reinforce and reiterate the purpose and timeline for RC implementation. In

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

85
addition to communicating the purpose and vision, short-term wins need to be communicated
throughout the implementation. Although school-wide implementation of RC is projected for
2020, TAS will need to be consistent with communication and boost motivation if
implementation takes longer than projected. This recommendation aligns with Kotter’s (1995)
advice of planning and creating short-term wins. Successful implementation of a program or
initiative takes time, but as Kotter (1995) pointed out, “when it becomes clear to people that
major change will take a long time, urgency levels can drop. Commitments to produce short-
term wins help keep the urgency level up and force detailed analytical thinking that can clarify or
revise visions” (p. 7). The international schools in this study used consistent and repeated
communication which, coupled with celebrating small wins, helped to ensure RC was never off
the radar and was viewed as a critical, necessary thread in the fabric of the school.
Perceived principal buy-in.
The second implication addresses the need for perceived principal buy-in. This
recommendation stems from the data provided by the RC consultant, MAS and LACES
administrators, MAS focus group participants, and research from the University of Virginia.
This data and research note the positive impact perceived principal buy-in plays in the successful
implementation of RC. TAS administrators are supportive of RC, but they are spread thin trying
to support all of the initiatives within the elementary school as well as designing the new
campus. TAS administrators can increase perceived buy-in through the use of teacher language
in meetings, email communication, and observations; attending RC workshops; using RC
structures during meetings; leading parent coffees and faculty meetings focused on RC;
providing a psychologically safe environment for teachers to experiment with RC structures;
highlighting links to RC resources in the Monday Brief; and observing teachers through a RC

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

86
lens. TAS administrators can also introduce the RC consultant to staff members before each
workshop in an effort to welcome the consultant, reiterate the school’s vision, and set the tone
for the learning that will take place.
Creating supporting structures.
The third implication acknowledges the challenges faced when creating structures so that
RC can be implemented with fidelity and continue to grow. The findings from this study
revealed that international schools who have successfully implemented RC provided a schedule
to accommodate morning meeting and closing circle. The international schools in this study also
created structures for ongoing training of both teachers and assistants, peer observations, and
access to resources. It is recommended that TAS look at how other international schools have
reworked their schedule to provide dedicated time for morning meeting and training for
classroom teachers, as well as special area teachers and instructional assistants. In addition to a
revised schedule, it is recommended that TAS look at other international schools’ systems for
providing organizational support through RC training, organizing peer observations, and
providing RC resources for every grade level.
Define non-negotiables.
The fourth implication addresses the need for clearly articulated “must dos.” The
international schools in this study have created non-negotiables around morning meeting and
closing circle. It is recommended that teachers receive professional development in
understanding how academics can be integrated into morning meetings. This understanding will
help create a seamless integration of academics and social emotional learning, while also
justifying the dedicated time set aside for morning meeting. Use of teacher language is also
strongly emphasized; however, both administrators and teachers recognize that this is something

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

87
that takes practice and time. The international schools in this study that have implemented RC
have also created schoolwide rules. TAS encourages its staff to experiment with RC; however,
administration has not clearly communicated which RC structures are non-negotiable.
Grow internal capacity.
The fifth, and final, implication addresses the need for internal capacity. Currently, TAS
relies on the RC consultant to provide initial and ongoing training. It is recommended that TAS
encourages staff to complete the advanced course for elementary educators and support teachers
in pursuing RC teacher certification. This internal capacity will help TAS as they onboard new
staff, provide small group mentoring, and can lead PLCs and faculty meetings on RC.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study focused on the success and challenges of implementing Responsive Classroom
(RC) in an international school setting so that Temasek American School (TAS) can effectively
and successfully implement RC within the elementary school. An analysis of the data identified
the influence that leadership had on the implementation of RC. To develop a fuller
understanding of importance of perceived principal buy-in, it is suggested that further data be
collected from international elementary school teachers using RC. All of the international
schools in this study are well-funded and well-resourced, so they were able to provide initial and
ongoing training as well as access to RC materials. It would be insightful to conduct a study of
smaller international elementary schools with less funding to understand how they have
implemented RC with fidelity. This study focused on the implementation of RC within
international elementary schools. RC also offers middle school training and resources. It is
suggested that studies be conducted with the goal of understanding the ways in which RC has
been implemented in both elementary and middle divisions within international schools.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

88
Conclusion
There is a growing recognition of the important role social emotional well-being plays in
children’s lives. Given that students spend most of their waking time in school, it makes sense
that well-being should be taught in schools through explicit social and emotional learning (SEL).
In an effort to boost well-being and promote student mental health, both the Child Mind Institute
and PISA recommend strengthening student/teacher relationships, supporting and training
teachers to build on student’s strengths, and creating inclusive classrooms communities (Child
Mind Institute, 2016; OECD PISA Report, 2016). A challenge for 21st-century schools is to
create communities that foster academic growth, as well as to support and explicitly teach social
and emotional skills to a culturally, economically, and socially diverse student population with
varying abilities and motivations (Learning First Alliance, n.d.). When schools realize that
teaching and learning are made up of academic, social, and emotional components (Durlak et al.,
2011; Zins, 2004), they can then empower students to be prepared and to thrive in the 21
st

Century as global citizens.
TAS is addressing the challenge by making SEL a priority, and is committed to
implementing the RC approach in the ES with fidelity. The purpose of this study was to examine
the implementation of RC in an international school setting so that TAS can effectively and
successfully do so within the elementary school. TAS has invested significant time and
resources into selecting the RC approach and the initial stages of training staff in the RC
approach. Although in the early stages of implementation, TAS has already begun adopting
promising practices utilized by other internationals schools. Through this study, TAS can learn
from other international schools who have successfully implemented RC by adopting their
promising practices and navigating around the barriers they faced along the way. Further

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

89
research is needed within international schools to determine the impact SEL and RC has within
these unique organizations.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

90
References
Abry, T., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Larsen, R. A., & Brewer, A. J. (2013). The influence of
fidelity of implementation on teacher–student interaction quality in the context of a
randomized controlled trial of the Responsive Classroom approach. Journal of School
Psychology, 51(4), 437-453.
Austin, D. B. (2005). The effects of a strengths development intervention program upon the self-
perception of students' academic abilities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66,
1631A. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/display/7432253
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Belfield, C., Bowden, A. B., Klapp, A., Levin, H., Shand, R., & Zander, S. (2015). The
economic value of social and emotional learning. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 6(03),
508-544. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rulesforengagement/SEL-
Revised.pdf
Benson, P. L. (2006). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and
responsible children and adolescents. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
Brdar, I., & Kashdan, T. B. (2010). Character strengths and well-being in Croatia: An empirical
investigation of structure and correlates. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 151-
154. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.12.001
Brock, L. L., Nishida, T. K., Chiong, C., Grimm, K. J., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2008).
Children's perceptions of the classroom environment and social and academic
performance: A longitudinal analysis of the contribution of the Responsive Classroom
approach. Journal of School Psychology, 46(2), 129-149. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2007.02.004

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

91
Brunwasser, S. M., Gillham, J. E., & Kim, E. S. (2009). A meta-analytic review of the Penn
Resiliency Program’s effect on depressive symptoms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 77(6), 1042-1054. doi: 10.1037/a0017671
Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2005). Effects of variation in teacher
organization on classroom functioning. Journal of School Psychology, 43(1), 61-85. doi:
10.1016/j.jsp.2004.12.002
Campbell, S. B., & von Stauffenberg, C. (2008). Child characteristics and family processes that
predict behavioral readiness for school. In A. Booth & A. C. Crouter (Eds.), Early
disparities in school readiness: How families contribute to transitions into school (pp.
225-258). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
Center for Responsive Schools, Inc. (CRS). (2015). Principles & practices, Retrieved from
https://www.responsiveclassroom.org/about/principles-practices/
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and
instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. Ageyev, & S. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s
educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:
10.1017/CBO9780511840975.004
Child Mind Institute. (2016). Children’s mental health report. Retrieved from
https://childmind.org/report/2016-childrens-mental-health-report/
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

92
Cutuli, J. J., Chaplin, T. M., Gillham, J. E., Reivich, K. J., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Preventing
cooccurring depression symptoms in adolescents with conduct problems. Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences, 1094(1), 282-286. doi: 10.1196/annals.1376.035
Denham, S. A., Brown, C., & Domitrovich, C. (2010). “Plays nice with others”: Social–
emotional learning and academic success. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 652-
680. doi: 10.1080/10409289.2010.497450
Denham, S. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2004). Social-emotional learning in early childhood. In E.
Chesebrough, P. King, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.). A blueprint for the promotion of prosocial
behavior in early childhood (pp.13-50). New York, NY: Springer.
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2014). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from
Denton, P. (2013). The power of our words: Teacher language that helps children learn. Turners
Falls, MA: Center for Responsive Schools, Inc.
Dexter, L. A. (2006). Elite and specialized interviewing. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.

Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and
passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087-
1101. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087
Durlak, J. A., & DuPree, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the
influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting
implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4), 327. doi:
10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

93
based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432. doi: doi:
10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A metaanalysis of afterschool
programs that seek to promote personal and social skills in children and adolescents.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 45(3-4), 294-309. Retrieved from
http://www.flume.com.br/pdf/Durlak_A_meta-analysisof_after_school.pdf
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
Elenkov, D. S., & Manev, I. M. (2005). Top management leadership and influence on
innovation: The role of sociocultural context. Journal of Management, 31(3), 381-402.
doi: 10.1177/0149206304272151
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial development. In N. Eisenberg,
W. Damon, & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and
personality development (6th ed.) (Vol. 3). (pp. 646-718). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons
Inc.
Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., & Weissberg, R. P. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning:
Guidelines for educators. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Elias, M., O’Brien, M. U., & Weissberg, R. P. (2006). Transformative leadership for social-
emotional learning. Principal Leadership, 7(5), 10-13. Retrieved from
https://www.nasponline.org/Documents/Resources and Publications...
Elias, M. J., & Weissberg, R. P. (2000). Primary prevention: Educational approaches to enhance
social and emotional learning. Journal of School Health, 70(5), 186-190. doi:
10.1111/j.1746-1561.2000.tb06470.x

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

94
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology,
2(3), 300. Retrieved from
http://www.unc.edu/peplab/publications/Fredrickson%201998.pdf
Fredrickson, B. (2009). Positivity. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
Froh, J. J., Kashdan, T. B., Yurkewicz, C., Fan, J., Allen, J., & Glowacki, J. (2010). The benefits
of passion and absorption in activities: Engaged living in adolescents and its role in
psychological well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(4), 311-332. doi:
10.1080/17439760.2010.498624
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3202507
Gillham, J. E., Hamilton, J., Freres, D. R., Patton, K., & Gallop, R. (2006). Preventing
depression among early adolescents in the primary care setting: A randomized controlled
study of the Penn Resiliency Program. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(2),
195-211. doi: 10.1007/s10802-005-9014-7
Glesne, C. (2010). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4
th
ed.). London, England:
Pearson.
Gordon, R., Ji, P., Mulhall, P., Shaw, B., & Weissberg, R. P. (2011). Social and emotional
learning for Illinois students: Policy, practice, and progress. Institute of Government and
Public Affairs, The Illinois Report, 68-83. Retrieved from
https://igpa.uillinois.edu/sites/igpa.uillinois.edu/files/reports/IR11-Ch6_SEL.pdf

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

95
Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., &
Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through
coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58(6-7),
466-474. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.466
Guerra, N. G., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008). Linking the prevention of problem behaviors and
positive youth development: Core competencies for positive youth development and risk
prevention. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2008(122), 1-17.
Retrieved from
http://ace.ucr.edu/people/nancy_guerra/nancy_pdfs/linking%20the%20prevention%20of
%20problem%20behaviors%20and%20positive%20youth%20development.pdf
Gumora, G., & Arsenio, W. F. (2002). Emotionality, emotion regulation, and school
performance in middle school children. Journal of School Psychology, 40(5), 395-413.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00108-5
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hofferth, S. L., & Sandberg, J. F. (2000). Changes in American children’s time, 1981-1997. Ann
Arbor, MI: PSC Publications. Retrieved from
https://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/pdf/rr00-456.pdf
Hunter, J. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). The positive psychology of interested adolescents.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32(1), 27-35. doi: 10.1023/A:1021028306392
International Positive Psychology Association. (n.d.). About us. Retrieved from
http://www.ippanetwork.org/about/

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

96
Kabat-Zinn, J., & Hanh, T. N. (2009). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body
and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. Crystal Lake, IL: Delta.
Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A.
Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Brighton, MA: Harvard
Business School Publishing.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Kristjánsson, K. (2012). Positive psychology and positive education: Old wine in new bottles?
Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 86-105. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2011.610678
Learning First Alliance. (n.d.). The elements of success: 10 million speak on schools that work.
Retrieved from https://learningfirst.org/elementsofsuccess
Masten, A. S., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). The development of competence in favorable and
unfavorable environments: Lessons from research on successful children. American
psychologist, 53(2), 205-220. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.2.205
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.) (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McGraw, K., Moore, S., Fuller, A., & Bates, G. (2008). Family, peer and school connectedness
in final year secondary school students. Australian Psychologist, 43(1), 27-37. doi:
10.1080/00050060701668637
Meiklejohn, J., Phillips, C., Freedman, M. L., Griffin, M. L., Biegel, G. . . . . Swendsen, J.
(2012). Integrating mindfulness training into K-12 education: Fostering the resilience of
teachers and students. Mindfulness, 3(4), 291-307. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0094-5
Merikangas, K. R., He, J. P., Burstein, M., Swanson, S. A., Avenevoli, S., Cui, L., . . .
Swendsen, J. (2010). Lifetime prevalence of mental disorders in US adolescents: results

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

97
from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication–Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A).
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 49(10), 980-989.
doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.05.017
Meyers, D. C., Durlak, J. A., & Wandersman, A. (2012). The quality implementation framework:
A synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 50(3-4), 462-480.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass
Ministry of Education, Singapore. (2016). Social and emotional learning. Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/programmes/social-and-emotional-learning
The NAESP Foundation Task Force on Early Learning. (2011). Building and supporting an
aligned system: A vision for transforming education across the pre-k to grade 3.
Alexandria, VA: NAESP.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (2009). Developmentally appropriate
practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth to age 8. Washington,
DC: NAEYC.
National Research Council. (2013). Education for life and work: Developing transferable
knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
National School Readiness Indicators Initiative. (2005). Getting ready: Findings from the
National School Readiness Indicators Initiative. Providence, RI: Rhode Island Kids
Count.
Norrish, J. M., & Seligman, M. (2015). Positive education: The Geelong Grammar School
Journey. New York, NY: Oxford Positive Psychology Series.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

98
Norrish, J. M., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2009). Positive psychology and adolescents: Where are
we now? Where to from here? Australian Psychologist, 44(4), 270-278. doi:
10.1080/00050060902914103
Oades, L. G., Robinson, P., & Green, S. (2011). Positive education: Creating flourishing
students, staff and schools. InPsych: The Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society
Ltd, 33(2), 16-21. Retrieved from
https://www.psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/2011/april/green/
OECD. (2016). The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Report. Retrieved
from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/
Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Strengths of character in schools. Handbook of Positive
Psychology in Schools, 1, 65-76.
Peterson, C. (2013). Pursuing the good life: 100 reflections in positive psychology. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social
and Clinical Psychology, 23(5), 603-619. doi: 10.1521/jscp.23.5.603.50748
Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. (2005). Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction:
The full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6(1), 25-41. doi:
10.1007/978-94-007-5702-8_9
Peterson, C., Ruch, W., Beermann, U., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. (2007). Strengths of
character, orientations to happiness, and life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 2(3), 149-156. doi: 10.1080/17439760701228938
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and
classification (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

99
Policy. (n.d.). Retrieved June 08, 2017, from http://www.casel.org/policy/
Positive Psychology Center. (2017). Our mission. Retrieved from https://ppc.sas.upenn.edu/our-
mission
Post, S. G. (2005). Altruism, happiness, and health: It’s good to be good. International Journal
of Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66-77. doi: 10.1207/s15327558ijbm1202_4
Post, S., & Neimark, J. (2008). Why good things happen to good people: How to live a longer,
healthier, happier life by the simple act of giving. New York, NY: Harmony Books.
Reeves, D. (2016). From leading to succeeding. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Rath, T., & Clifton, D. O. (2004). How full is your bucket? Washington, DC: Gallup Press.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Fan, X., Chiu, Y. J., & You, W. (2007). The contribution of the
Responsive Classroom approach on children's academic achievement: Results from a
three-year longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychology, 45(4), 401-421. doi:
10.1016/j.jsp.2006.10.003
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E.,& Sawyer, B. E. (2004). Primary-grade teachers’self-efficacy beliefs,
attitudes toward teaching,and discipline and teaching practice priorities in relation to the
responsive classroom approach. Elementary School Journal, 104(4), 321–341. doi:
10.1086/499756
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Storm, M. D., Sawyer, B. E., Pianta, R. C., & LaParo, K. M. (2006). The
Teacher Belief Q-Sort: A measure of teachers' priorities in relation to disciplinary
practices, teaching practices, and beliefs about children. Journal of School Psychology,
44(2), 141-165. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.01.003
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

100
Scaccia, J. P., Cook, B. S., Lamont, A., Wandersman, A., Castellow, J., Katz, J., & Beidas, R. S.
(2015). A practical implementation science heuristic for organizational readiness: R =
Mc2. Journal of Community Psychology, 43(4), 484-501. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21698
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
& Sons.
Seligman, M. E. (2008). Positive Education and the new prosperity: Australia’s edge. Education
Today, 8(3), 20-21. Retrieved from
http://www.minnisjournals.com.au/articles/ET%20Aug-
Sep%20web%20pp%2020_21%20(10.9.08)-11.pdf
Seligman, M. E. (2012). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being.
New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction (pp. 279-
298). Utrecht, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands.
Seligman, M. E., Ernst, R. M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K., & Linkins, M. (2009). Positive
education: Positive psychology and classroom interventions. Oxford Review of
Education, 35(3), 293-311. doi: 10.1080/03054980902934563
Social and Emotional Learning. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/programmes/social-and-emotional-learning
Steger, M. F., Kashdan, T. B., & Oishi, S. (2008). Being good by doing good: Daily eudaimonic
activity and well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 22-42. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2007.03.004
The Global Achievement Gap. (n.d.). Tony Wagner. Retrieved from
http://www.tonywagner.com/resources/the-global-achievement-gap

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

101
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wanless, S. B., & Domitrovich, C. E. (2015). Readiness to implement school-based social-
emotional learning interventions: Using research on factors related to implementation to
maximize quality. Prevention Science, 16(8), 1037-1043. doi: 10.1007/s11121-015-0612-
5
Wanless, S. B., Patton, C. L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Deutsch, N. L. (2012). Setting-level
influences on implementation of the Responsive Classroom approach. Prevention
Science, 14(1), 40-51. doi: 10.1007/s11121-0120294-1
Wanless, S. B., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Abry, T., Larsen, R. A., & Patton, C. L. (2014).
Engagement in training as a mechanism to understanding fidelity of implementation of
the Responsive Classroom Approach. Prevention Science, 16(8), 1107-1116. doi:
10.1007/s11121-014-0519-6
Waters, L. (2011). A review of school-based positive psychology interventions. The Australian
Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 28(02), 75-90. doi: 10.1375/aedp.28.2.75
Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2004). Leadership that sparks learning.
Educational Leadership, 61(7), 48-51. Retrieved from https://asge6130-instructional-
leadership.wikispaces.com/file/view/leadership+that+sparks+learning_marzano.pdf
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: Free Press.
Weissberg, R. P., & Greenberg, M. T. (1998). School and community competence-enhancement
and prevention programs. Journal of Mental Health, 7(5), 479-492. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232496939_School_and_Community_Compete
nce-Enhancement_and_Prevention_Programs

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

102
Weissberg, R. P., Kumpfer, K. L., & Seligman, M. E. (2003). Prevention that works for children
and youth: An introduction. American Psychologist, 58(6-7), 425-432. doi:
10.1037/0003-066X.58.6-7.425
Wood, C., & Freeman-Loftis, B. (2015). Responsive School Discipline: Essentials for
Elementary School Leaders. Turners Falls, MA: Center for Responsive Schools, Inc.
Zins, J. E. (Ed.). (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What
does the research say? New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Zins, J. E., & Elias, M. J. (2007). Social and emotional learning: Promoting the development of
all students. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 17(2-3), 233-255.
doi: 10.1080/10474410701413152
2016 Children's Mental Health Report. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://childmind.org/report/2016-
childrens-mental-health-report/

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

103
Appendices
Appendix A: Informed Consent Information Sheet for Research

University of Southern California
Information Sheet for Research

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RESPONSIVE CLASSROOM WITHIN
INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Sarah Farris, principal investigator, and
Ruth Chung, faculty advisor, at the University of Southern California because you have used Responsive
Classroom within an international elementary school setting. Your participation is voluntary. You should
read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding
whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to examine the success and challenges of implementing Responsive
Classroom (RC) in an international school setting so that Singapore American School (SAS) can
effectively and successfully implement RC within the SAS elementary school.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 60 to 90 minute interview or
focus group. You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to. Any information I obtain from
interviews and focus groups will be used for research purposes only. For focus group participants, you
will remain anonymous. For interview participants, your job title will be used as an identifier. Information
gathered may be used in my reporting.

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks for you in participating in this study.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
Inquiry on the implementation and development of the RC approach at SAS will help guide SAS as it
moves forward in its quest to provide social emotional learning (SEL) to help students develop social and
emotional wellness as stated in the SAS 2020 Strategic Plan. Findings from the study can be used to
avoid potential implementation barriers. In addition, findings from the study can be used to form
promising practices that can be leveraged to help SAS become a leader in the field of SEL, particularly
with the RC approach. On a global scale, the findings of this study may offer guidance to other
international schools as they look to implement SEL, particularly the RC approach, in their schools. This
study may provide an international perspective to the research and help guide international schools who
want to tailor RC to the unique needs of their school community.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

104

CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we are
required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. The members of the
research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP)
may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of
research subjects.

The data will be stored in passcode-protected devices. The audio recording will only be used for the
purpose of this study. Upon successful completion of the dissertation the audio recordings will be
destroyed.

The interview and focus group discussion will be read and highlighted for (a) notes and memos, (b)
recurring phrases, (c) key phrases or words, and (d) key phrases and words that align with literature. Each
unit of the highlighted descriptive data will be copied and pasted into a spreadsheet under the column
labeled as key phrases or chunks, one unit of descriptive data per row. Data analysis of the units of
descriptive data generated categories and eventually the emergence of key themes. Throughout the data
analysis process, the research questions and literature will frame the identification of units of descriptive
data that will be selected, highlighted and coded. This process will be repeated for all interviews and
focus group discussion transcripts for emerging categories and themes.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the following:
Lead investigator: Sarah Farris: sfarris@sas.edu.sg
Committee Chair: Dr. Ruth Chung: rchung@usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research
in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of
the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South
Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.

I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. My questions
have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study.

_______________________________ ______________________
Signature of participant Date

_______________________________ ______________________
Name of participants Title/Position

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

105
Appendix B: Interview Guide: Mumbai American School and London American Community
Elementary School
Interview Questions Linked to Building Rapport and Context: Mumbai American School and
London American Community Elementary School

Building Rapport and Context
Introduction: I would like you to tell me a little about yourself and your experience in education.
1. How long have you worked at Mumbai American School/London American Community
Elementary School?

2. What did you know about social emotional learning (SEL) prior to implementing Responsive
Classroom (RC)?

3. What prompted you to adopt SEL at your school?
4. There are many SEL programs and approaches available. Tell me about your decision to bring
RC to your school. What drew you to RC?

Interview Questions Linked to Implementation Readiness: Mumbai American School and
London American Community Elementary School

Implementation Readiness
Transition: Thank you for sharing your insight on SEL and RC. I’d like to ask you some
questions about implementation readiness.

1. Research has shown that a program’s success, as well as the impact on student outcomes, is
undermined with poor implementation and lack of support. How did you and your team
communicate the need to implement RC?

2. Special consideration needs to be paid to organizational culture. How did you and your team
gauge how receptive staff were to the new initiative?

3. How, if at all, did you communicate to your staff and school community about the timeline for
implementation? What guidelines did you use to establish a realistic timeline for your school?

4. Some people would say that any new initiative will fail unless capacity is built and staff feel
motivated. What would you tell them?

Interview Questions Linked to Initial Training and Professional Development: Mumbai
American School and London American Community Elementary School

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

106
Initial Training and Professional Development
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on implementation readiness. Now I’m
going to ask you specifically about training and professional development.

1. Initial RC training takes four days. Tell me how you and your staff decided on the initial
training of staff given the training would take four days?

2. Given the size of your elementary school, what factors needed special attention when
providing initial training for your staff?

3. What did you hope to accomplish through the initial training?

4. What expectations, if any, were communicated to staff about implementing RC practices and
strategies after their initial training?

5. Research on the successful implementation of SEL and RC point to ongoing professional
development (PD) and the role of coaches. How did you and your team provide this support to
your staff?

6. What roadblocks did you encounter during initial training?

Interview Questions Linked to School-wide Support: Mumbai American School and London
American Community Elementary School

School-wide Support
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on initial training and ongoing
professional development. Both CASEL and Geelong Grammar School stress the importance of
removing barriers and providing support school-wide to ensure success. I’d like to ask you some
questions about school-wide support.

1. Some people say that the schedule runs the school. What importance did the schedule play
when implementing RC?

2. Responsive Classroom offers a book, Responsive Classroom Assessment Tool for Teachers,
for educators to reflect on learning, identify areas of strength, and set goals. What structure, if
any, did you and your team provide staff to ensure they were growing with their use of RC
practices and strategies?

3. Research stresses the importance of perceived principal buy-in. Implementation is linked to
administrators’ support, belief, and involvement of interventions. How do you and your
administrative team ensure you are “walking the talk” and not just “talking the talk?”

4. What role, if any, did staff meetings and professional learning communities (PLC) play in
school-wide support?

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

107

Interview Questions Linked to the Use of Data to Improve Practices: Mumbai American School
and London American Community Elementary School

Use of Data to Improve Practices
Transition: Great, thank you. I am now going to focus on the use of data and planning for short-
term wins. Both CASEL and John Kotter point to the use of data to improve practices. Given that
RC implementation is a marathon, and not a sprint, planning for and creating short-term wins is
important when enthusiasm begins to wane.

1. What role, if any, did data play in the implementation of RC at your school?

2. How did you and your team communicate short-term wins to staff and the school community?

3. When communicating short-term wins, was the focus on teacher perceptions or student
perceptions? How did you capture the perceptions of all stakeholders?

Interview Questions Linked to Insights: Mumbai American School and London American
Community Elementary School

Insights
Transition: As part of our wrap-up, I’m interested on your overall reflections on the
implementation of RC.

1.What advice would you give to schools looking to implement RC?

2. What advantages and disadvantages, if any, do international schools implementing RC
possess?

3. When did you know that RC was successfully implemented? Was there a moment when staff
described RC practices and strategies as a way of thinking and behaving?

Closing: Thank you for your time today. I appreciate your insights about implementing RC. I
also appreciate your support of my study.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

108
Appendix C: Interview Guide: Temasek American School
Interview Questions Linked to Building Rapport and Context: Temasek American School

Building Rapport and Context
Introduction: I would like you to tell me a little about yourself and your experience in education.
1. How long have you worked at Temasek American School?
2. What did you know about social emotional learning (SEL) prior to the R&D process?

3. What prompted you to adopt SEL at your school?
4. There are many SEL programs and approaches available. Tell me about your decision to bring
RC to your school. What drew you to RC?

Interview Questions Linked to Implementation Readiness: Temasek American School

Implementation Readiness
Transition: Thank you for sharing your insight on SEL and RC. I’d like to ask you some
questions about implementation readiness.

1. Research has shown that a program’s success, as well as the impact on student outcomes, is
undermined with poor implementation and lack of support. How do you and your team plan to
communicate the need to implement RC?

2. Special consideration needs to be paid to organizational culture. How did you and your team
gauge how receptive staff are to the new initiative given how many initiatives are taking place
within the elementary school division?

3. How did you communicate to your staff and school community about the timeline for
implementation? What guidelines did you use to establish a realistic timeline for your school?

4. Some people would say that any new initiative will fail unless capacity is built and staff feel
motivated. What would you tell them?

Interview Questions Linked to Initial Training and Professional Development: Temasek
American School

Initial Training and Professional Development
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on implementation readiness. Now I’m
going to ask you specifically about training and professional development.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

109
1. Initial RC training takes four days. Tell me how you and your staff plan on the initial training
of staff given the training would take four days.

2. Given the size of your elementary school, what factors needed special attention when
providing initial training for your staff?

3. What do you hope to accomplish through the initial training?

4. What expectations, if any, will be communicated to staff about implementing RC practices and
strategies after their initial training?

5. Research on the successful implementation of SEL and RC point to ongoing professional
development (PD) and the role of coaches. How will you and your team provide this support to
your staff?

6. What roadblocks do you perceive you will encounter during initial training?

Interview Questions Linked to School-wide Support: Temasek American School

School-wide Support
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on initial training and ongoing
professional development. Both CASEL and Geelong Grammar School stress the importance of
removing barriers and providing support school-wide to ensure success. I’d like to ask you some
questions about school-wide support.

1. Some people say that the schedule runs the school. What importance will the schedule play
when implementing RC?

2. Responsive Classroom offers a book, Responsive Classroom Assessment Tool for Teachers,
for educators to reflect on learning, identify areas of strength, and set goals. What structure, if
any, will you and your team provide staff to ensure they are growing with their use of RC
practices and strategies?

3. Research stresses the importance of perceived principal buy-in. Implementation is linked to
administrators’ support, belief, and involvement of interventions. How do you and your
administrative team plan to ensure you are “walking the talk” and not just “talking the talk?”

4. What role, if any, will staff meetings and professional learning communities (PLC) play in
school-wide support?

Interview Questions Linked to the Use of Data to Improve Practices: Temasek American School

Use of Data to Improve Practices

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

110
Transition: Great, thank you. I am now going to focus on the use of data and planning for short-
term wins. Both CASEL and John Kotter point to the use of data to improve practices. Given that
RC implementation is a marathon, not a sprint, planning for, and creating short-term wins is
important when enthusiasm begins to wane.

1. What role, if any, will data play in the implementation of RC at your school?

2. How will you and your team communicate short-term wins to staff and the school community?

3. When communicating short-term wins, will the focus be on teacher perceptions or student
perceptions? How did you plan to capture the perceptions of all stakeholders?

Interview Questions Linked to Insights: Temasek American School

Insights
Transition: As part of our wrap-up, I’m interested in your thoughts on the implementation of RC.

1.What advice would you appreciate from other international schools who have implemented
RC?

2. What advantages and disadvantages, if any, do international schools implementing RC
possess?

3. When will you know that RC is successfully implemented? Do you imagine a moment when
staff will describe RC practices and strategies as a way of thinking and behaving?

Closing: Thank you for your time today. I appreciate your insights about implementing RC. I
also appreciate your support of my study.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

111
Appendix D: Interview Guide: Responsive Classroom Consultant
Interview Questions Linked to Building Rapport and Context: Responsive Classroom Consultant

Building Rapport and Context
Introduction: I would like you to tell me a little about yourself and your experience in education.
1. How long have you worked for Responsive Classroom (RC)?
2. What did you know about social emotional learning (SEL) prior to joining RC?

3. What drew you to RC?
4. How many international schools have you worked with on implementing RC?

Interview Questions Linked to Implementation Readiness: Responsive Classroom Consultant

Implementation Readiness
Transition: Thank you for sharing your insight on SEL and RC. I’d like to ask you some
questions about implementation readiness.

1. Research has shown that a program’s success, as well as the impact on student outcomes, is
undermined with poor implementation and lack of support. How have you seen schools
successfully communicate the need to implement RC?

2. How do you and your team gauge how receptive staff are to RC?

3. What guidelines do you use to establish a realistic timeline for schools?

4. Some people would say that any new initiative will fail unless capacity is built and staff feel
motivated. What do you tell them?

Interview Questions Linked to Initial Training and Professional Development: Responsive
Classroom Consultant

Initial Training and Professional Development
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on implementation readiness. Now I’m
going to ask you specifically about training and professional development.

1. Initial RC training takes four days. Tell me how you and your team work with schools to
decide on the initial training of staff?

2. Schools vary in size and demographics. What factors, if any, need special attention when
providing initial training to schools?

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

112
3. What do you hope to accomplish through the initial four-day training?

4. What expectations, if any, should be communicated to staff about implementing RC practices
and strategies after their initial training?

5. Research on the successful implementation of SEL and RC point to ongoing professional
development (PD) and the role of coaches. How do you and your team provide this support to
schools?

6. What roadblocks have you seen schools encounter during initial training?

Interview Questions Linked to School-wide Support: Responsive Classroom Consultants

School-wide Support
Transition: Great, thank you for sharing your thoughts on initial training and ongoing
professional development. Both CASEL and Geelong Grammar School stress the importance of
removing barriers and providing support school-wide to ensure success. I’d like to ask you some
questions about school-wide support.

1. Some people say that the schedule runs the school. What importance does the schedule play
when implementing RC?

2. Responsive Classroom offers a book, Responsive Classroom Assessment Tool for Teachers,
for educators to reflect on learning, identify areas of strength, and set goals. How can schools
best support the ongoing development and growth of staff?

3. Research stresses the importance of perceived principal buy-in. Implementation is linked to
administrators’ support, belief, and involvement of interventions. In your experience, do you
agree with this research? What advice do you have for administration?

4. What role, if any, do staff meetings and professional learning communities (PLC) play in
school-wide support?

5. What is the most common pitfall schools encounter in terms of school-wide support?

Interview Questions Linked to the Use of Data to Improve Practices: Responsive Classroom
Consultant

Use of Data to Improve Practices
Transition: Great, thank you. I am now going to focus on the use of data and planning for short-
term wins. Both CASEL and John Kotter point to the use of data to improve practices. Given that

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

113
RC implementation is a marathon, not a sprint, planning for and creating short-term wins is
important when enthusiasm begins to wane.

1. How have you seen data used with RC?

2. What advice do you have for schools when communicating short-term wins to staff and the
school community?

Interview Questions Linked to Insights: Responsive Classroom Consultants

Insights
Transition: As part of our wrap-up, I’m interested in your advice for implementing RC.

1.What advice would you give to schools looking to implement RC?

2. What advantages and disadvantages, if any, do international schools implementing RC
possess?

3. How will schools know when RC has been successfully implemented? In your experience, is
there a moment when staff described RC practices and strategies as a way of thinking and
behaving?

Closing: Thank you for your time today. I appreciate your insights about implementing RC. I
also appreciate your support of my study.

EXAMINING APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING RC INTL SCHOOLS

114
Appendix E: Focus Group Guide: Mumbai American School
Focus Group Questions Linked to Implementation: Mumbai American School

Implementation
1.How long has Mumbai American School (MAS) been using Responsive Classroom?

2. In what ways has the school invested in Responsive Classroom?

3. What is the purpose of Responsive Classroom?

Focus Group Questions Linked to Promising Practices: Mumbai American School

Promising Practices
1.What were some practices that helped promote initial buy-in of Responsive Classroom?

2. What are some practices that helped guide the implementation of Responsive Classroom and
made the process easier to implement?

Focus Group Questions Linked to Barriers: Mumbai American School

Barriers
1. What were/are some barriers that you have experienced that have prevented Responsive
Classroom from being fully maximized at MAS?

2. Was it difficult implementing Responsive Classroom at MAS? Why?

Focus Group Questions Linked to Insights: Mumbai American School

Insights
1.What advice would you give to international schools beginning their Responsive Classroom
journey?

2. Anything else you’d like to share regarding the implementation and development of
Responsive Classroom at MAS?

For additional resources - http://dissertationedd.usc.edu/
DSC contact information – rsoedsc@rossier.usc.edu or (213)740-8099

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the implementation of Responsive Classroom (RC) in an international school setting so that Temasek American School (TAS) can successfully implement RC within the elementary school. This study looked at two comparable international schools and their journey to RC implementation. The following research questions were used to guide this study: What are some promising practices these two international schools have used to develop school-wide buy-in of the RC approach, understanding of the four domains, and use of the key RC practices and strategies used with fidelity? What are some barriers experienced by these two international schools when implementing RC? What lessons does the elementary division at TAS need to learn from these two international schools in order to implement RC with fidelity? In order to answer these questions, this qualitative study analyzed data from interviews with administrators from international schools, a consultant from Responsive Classroom and a focus group of elementary international school educators. Findings from this study revealed several promising practices and barriers. The promising practices included shared philosophy, perceived principal buy-in, removal of organizational barriers, providing initial and ongoing training, creating supporting structures to keep RC alive, and the importance of personalizing RC to reflect each school’s unique culture and setting. The barriers were schedule, use of common teacher language, and working with a transient population. Through this study, TAS and other international schools can learn lessons from the data provided in order to successfully implement a social emotional learning (SEL) framework within their setting.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

How urban high school principals implement social and emotional learning (SEL)

PDF

Teachers' experiences implementing social and emotional learning in the elementary classroom

PDF

A relational approach to discipline: a comparative case study of restorative justice implementation in US secondary schools

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools

PDF

Implementing Chinese-English dual language programs in international schools: a study for an international school in southeast Asia

PDF

Teacher leadership for personalized learning: An implementation study in an international school

PDF

A qualitative study on Hawaii's use of Race to the Top funding on extended learning time in a Zone of School Innovation

PDF

Exploring classroom strategies used by child development student-teachers working with children at risk for reactive attachment disorder

PDF

Implementation of a Reggio inspired approach at the progressive academy of Southeast Asia's Early Childhood Center

PDF

Considerations for personalized professional learning at International Academy of South East Asia: a gap analysis

PDF

Enacting ideology: an examination of the connections between teacher ideology, classroom climate, and teacher interpretation of student behavior

PDF

Implementation of the PLC coaching model at American Community School

PDF

Appropriate technology implementation in K-12 classrooms

PDF

Through the eyes of art: uncovering promising practices in arts-themed learning in California charter elementary schools

PDF

The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams

PDF

Leveraging social-emotional learning to improve school climate, mental health, and student achievement in K-12 student populations

PDF

Best practices general education teachers implement to foster a positive classroom environment

PDF

Efective leadership practices used by elementary school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Harnessing Genius Hour school-wide: examining teachers' perceptions of the implementation of personalized inquiry across an international middle school

PDF

A multiple case study: inclusion in international schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Farris, Sarah Anne (author)

Core Title Examining approaches to implementing Responsive Classroom within international schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 08/05/2018

Defense Date 08/03/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag elementary school,implementation,international schools,OAI-PMH Harvest,pastoral care,positive education,principal buy-in,Responsive Classroom,school counselling,SEL,social emotional learning

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Chung, Ruth (committee chair), Green, Alan (committee member), Picus, Lawrence (committee member)

Creator Email rudyramona@gmail.com,sfarris@sas.edu.sg

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-52383

Unique identifier UC11669362

Identifier etd-FarrisSara-6643.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-52383 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-FarrisSara-6643.pdf

Dmrecord 52383

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Farris, Sarah Anne

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA