WOWW:

Working with school

staff to improve
classroom behaviour
and
Relationships

Dr Emma L Brown (Educational

Psychologist (Probationer)),
Emma Powell (Assistant Educational
Psychologist for Research)
Aberdeen City Educational Psychology
Service
Adele Clark (Class Teacher)
Skene Square Primary School
January April 2010
Report written Summer 2010

1
 WOWW: Working with school staff to improve classroom behaviour and
relationships.
Dr Emma L Brown (Educational Psychologist (Probationer)), Emma Powell
(Assistant Educational Psychologist for Research)
Aberdeen City Educational Psychology Service
Adele Clark (Class Teacher, Skene Square Primary School)

Abstract
This project was conducted collaboratively with staff in a mainstream
Primary School in Aberdeen. The target class was a Primary one/two
composite, whose behaviour was proving challenging to teaching staff. The
Working on What Works (WOWW, Berg & Shilts, 2004, 2005) programme was
used over a period of ten weeks. Results demonstrated an improvement in
teacher ratings on a 10 point scale, for four targets set and rated by the class
teacher at baseline. These targets focused on creating a more positive ethos
in the classroom, with pupils working together, showing respect to teaching
staff and each other, and displaying good listening skills. Pupils set their own
targets at the end of week three of the project (being helpful, polite and putting
their hands up). Observations of pupils against these targets and their own
class-ratings, demonstrated improvements in each target set. During an
evaluation discussion pupils stated they had enjoyed the project, and reported
meeting their targets. Teacher ratings on the original targets at follow-up
evaluation (12 weeks after the project had been completed) found that pupils
had maintained the positive improvements, and in one case (showing respect
towards adults), they were rated higher than they had been at the evaluation
at project completion. The class teacher has integrated the principles of
WOWW into her practice and plans are in place to disseminate the approach
and results across teaching staff within the school.

1.0 Introduction
The Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act (The
ASL Act, 2004) and The Standards in Scotlands Schools etc. Act (2000) have
resulted in the social, and academic inclusion of a wider range of pupils than
ever before, in mainstream classes in Scotland. Both Acts have impacted on
the role of the Educational Psychologist (EP) in terms of identifying,
assessing, planning for and reviewing these pupils alongside school staff and
other professionals. Gersch (2004) noted that today EPs are responding to a

2
very wide range of problems faced by children, families, parents, teachers,
other school staff and Local Education Authorities (LEAs), and perhaps this
has resulted from changes in legislation toward the inclusion of all pupils.
This study describes the successful implementation of a solution-
oriented approach which aimed to impact on the behavioural, social, and
emotional well-being of a class of Primary one/two pupils.

1.1 Solution Oriented Approaches

Over the past decade, EPs have become interested in adopting a focus
on solutions when working with children, young people, families and schools.
One particular approach used by EPs is Solution Focused Brief Therapy
(SFBT), a therapeutic approach developed by de Shazer and colleagues
which focuses on change and hope, investigating solutions to problems,
rather than analysing the problem itself (Ajmal, 2001). A variety of studies
have found that solution oriented/focused approaches can have a positive
impact on children and young people in school settings (e.g. Franklin, Moore
& Hopson, 2008; Kim & Franklin, 2009; Stearn & Moore, 2001; Strachan,
2001).
An EP working in a solution-focused/oriented way will: acknowledge
the importance of identifying the clients strengths; help them explore
exceptions to the problem situation (to build on what is already working);
explore their goal state; investigate who can help them reach the goal state;
identify the first step towards the goal state, and generally facilitate the clients
thinking about possible solutions (Ajmal, 2001; Rees, 2008). These
statements could be made about an EP using the Working on What Works
(WOWW, Berg & Shilts, 2004) approach.

1.2 Working on What Works (WOWW)

The WOWW approach was developed by Berg and Shilts, based on
the principles of SFBT (Berg & Shilts, 2004). In particular it focuses on
looking for exceptions to problem situations (i.e. times when the problem
situation is less problematic, or the problem does not exist), working on what
already is working (i.e. maintaining and building on existing good practice),
believing that change is constant and inevitable and that professionals should

3
always be looking for small, positive changes which can be built on to bring
about bigger change (the snowball effect). The approach is also
underpinned by the belief that the future is negotiated and created, thus taking
the view that people have control over their future. Finally, the approach
suggests that the solution is not always directly related to the problem, and
thus highlights the importance in thinking creatively about solutions (Berg &
Shilts, 2004).
WOWW is described as a practical tool to help solve everyday
problems in the classroom (Berg & Shilts, 2004). It aims to build positive
relationships between the teacher and pupils through collaborative goal
setting and team working. Berg and Shilts (2005) outline the process of the
WOWW programme, which has three key stages. The first stage is referred
to as the Observation Phase, and lasts for three weeks (Kelly, Kim & Franklin,
2008). During this initial stage the WOWW coach (i.e. someone external to
the classroom who is working from the fundamental principles of WOWW as
detailed above), observes the class, looking for positive things to feedback to
the pupils and teacher following the observation. Each pupil is given
individual feedback about one thing the observer noticed during the
observation (e.g. Tommy, I noticed that you raised your hand when you
wanted to talk). Berg and Shilts (2005) then state that time should be taken
to give the teacher his/her feedback after class. The period of
observation/feedback should be around one hour.
During stage Two (around weeks four/five) the aim is for the pupils and
teaching staff to collaboratively set classroom goals. The goals must be
achievable goals, and Berg and Shilts (2005) suggest that a good way to
discuss goals with pupils is to ask them what makes it a good classroom, and
build on this. Pupils and the teacher are then asked to scale each goal they
have set themselves on a scale from one ten (Berg & Shilts, 2005, also
describe other methods for scaling such as smiley/unhappy faces). They
would then be asked what it would take for the class to move one point up the
scale. For example, if the goal were to be to show respect to each other and
the class scaled themselves at seven on a scale, the coach would ask what
behaviour it would take to move to an eight or a nine (Kelly et al, 2008).
Scaling is a class activity, and it is important that students are thinking about

4
the behaviour of the whole class, rather than themselves, when making a
judgement about scaling.
Stage three of the approach involves regular scaling of classroom
success and amplifying (Kelly et al, 2008). This should be the focus of the
remaining WOWW sessions. The teacher may put the scaling goal on the
board as a visual reminder to the class. Teachers should work with the pupils
to scale themselves daily. During the weekly visits the WOWW coach focuses
their observations on behaviour in line with the goals set by the class.
Berg and Shilts (2005) provide ideas about how to keep the approach
fresh and challenging for the participants, noting that goals can be changed
once they have been mastered, and the teacher can adapt the scaling /
positive discussion around goals as necessary. For example, they describe
how one teacher made a WOWW chair as a reward for the one student who
WOWW-ed her this pupil was given special privileges by the teacher and
the rest of the class.
1.2.1 WOWW The Evidence
There is a dearth of published findings with regard to the evidence-
base of WOWW, however, what is available suggests it has the power to
influence positive change.
Berg and Shilts (2004, 2005) provide case studies of the WOWW
approach being used with positive results in classrooms. For example, Berg
and Shilts (2005) describe how a year long WOWW intervention resulted in
positive changes in: pupil behaviour (some students thinking before they act,
being calmer and more on task); respect toward the teacher (being polite),
and students pride in their work. Further, Kelly and Bluestone-Miller (2009)
report that, in a pilot study of WOWW (with 21 teachers in 5 schools) WOWW
resulted in an increase in teachers perceptions: of their classes as better
behaved; of themselves as effective classroom managers; and increased the
teachers sense that pupils would view themselves as better behaved. While
this study reports positive findings, the results are based solely on teacher
perceptions on a five point rating scale. It is questionable whether such a
limited rating scale allowed teachers to give detailed ratings. Further there is
no data regarding how pupils experienced the approach, and their perception
of positive change. Kelly (personal communication, 18 th July 2010), noted that

5
an application has been made for a grant to conduct a clinical trial of WOWW
in Chicago.
In Scotland Moray Educational Psychology Service (EPS) and
Inclusion Support Outreach Service have been at the forefront of using the
approach with local schools (Bruce, Mackintosh & McDonald, 2009). Bruce et
al presented data from an evaluation of WOWW in seven classrooms. Each
project ran for 10 weeks, and the coaches were two teachers working for the
Outreach Service. Coaches worked in pairs in the classroom, and provided
feedback collaboratively. Positive feedback was provided to the teacher in the
presence of the pupils, a deviation from the format suggested by Berg and
Shilts (2005). Pupils generally rated the sessions as positive and enjoyed
hearing the feedback (both to themselves, and to their teacher). In addition
the majority suggested their class had improved as a result of the programme
(e.g. improved relationships, working, listening, behaviour, and pupils taking
on personal responsibility), and they now regarded their teacher in a more
positive manner. Evaluation data from teachers (linked to pre-intervention
goals) revealed that WOWW had benefitted both their own practice (including
helping to target, and provide, appropriate praise, giving confidence to work
with pupils to develop community, re-affirmed techniques, helped move them
out of a fairly negative mindset about the class), and the behaviour/attitude of
pupils (e.g. making them more aware of how their behaviour affects others,
making them more focused, making them feel more valued, giving them a
standard to aspire to). The teachers also reported that hearing feedback
about themselves was positive, with only one teacher reporting they found
hearing this feedback embarrassing. Finally all teachers reported they would
recommend WOWW to another teacher. Thus the evaluation in Moray was
largely positive.

1.3 The Current Study

The current study emerged from consultation with a Head Teacher and Class

Teacher (third author) around the behaviour and learning of pupils in a

Primary one/two composite class. It was agreed that the Class Teacher would

value the support of the EP in improving behaviour and relationships within

6
the classroom, particularly between peers. It was further agreed that the

WOWW approach would be an appropriate intervention to target the areas of

concern in the classroom. The work also fitted well with the current drive

across Aberdeen City to embed solution oriented practice into all classrooms.

The aims of this project were to positively impact on the behaviour and

relationships within the particular classroom through collaborative working

with school staff and pupils, while contributing to professional knowledge of

effectiveness of the WOWW approach.

2.0 Methodology

2.1 Participants
The pupils (N=25) who participated in this project were aged between
five years one month and six years three months at the time the project
commenced. They formed a Primary one/two composite class, where eight of
the pupils had English as an Additional Language (EAL). Adult teaching staff
included the Class Teacher, Pupil Support Assistant and a Depute Head
Teacher who covered the class during the regular teachers non-class contact
time. A Behaviour Support Teacher also worked with the class for one hour
weekly, with a focus on social skills. The Head Teacher was supportive of the
project throughout, and was a key participant in planning the approach, and in
supporting the Class Teacher throughout.
The coaches/facilitators were the schools designated EP, and an
Assistant EP for Research.

2.2 Process and Data Collection

The approach followed the format set out by Berg and Shilts (2005),
with the adaptations made by Moray being incorporated (teacher feedback in
class, intervention over 10 weeks). At a planning meeting with the Head
Teacher and Class Teacher, the Class Teacher provided information about the
areas she would like to see the project target. This information was translated

7
into four targets and recorded on a Target Monitoring and Evaluation (TME)
form (adapted from Dunsmuir, Brown, Iyadurai & Monsen, 2009). The Class
Teacher was asked to rate the class, on a scale from one to ten, on each of
the four targets set (Baseline rating). This rating was based on her perception
of the amount of time the target would be met in class at that time, and/or the
proportion of pupils in the class who would regularly meet that target. In line
with solution-oriented scaling, the teacher was also asked to provide
information about where she would like the class to be on the 10 point scale
when the project was completed (Expected rating).
After parental consent had been received for the project to go ahead,
the Class Teacher introduced the class to the project and to the EP
(Probationer) and Assistant EP for Research. During the initial period of
observation (weeks one to three), the focus of observation and feedback was
on the four targets set by the Class Teacher during planning (although the
class were not explicitly informed of the themes/targets behind the
observations). At the end of week three, following feedback, the authors, in
collaboration with the Class Teacher, asked the class to set themselves goals
to work toward. The class discussed this in terms of what makes a hard
working class, and agreed three targets which were then each scaled on a
scale from one to ten (with some visual support). A discussion followed about
what would help the class to move up the scale. The Class Teacher
consolidated the pupils understanding and experience of using the goals and
scaling over a two week period when the observation/feedback could not go
ahead due to illness of the EP (Probationer). The class scaled themselves
daily for each goal, and the Class Teacher reminded them of the goals
regularly throughout the day. During weeks six to ten of observation/feedback
the weekly sessions re-commenced, with the focus being on the class goals
and scaling.
At the end of the 10 weeks, which was just prior to the Easter holidays,
the EP (Probationer) and Assistant EP for Research met with the Head
Teacher and Class Teacher to evaluate the project. The Class Teacher was
asked to reflect on the original four targets, and to provide a rating on the 10
point scale, for where the class were at the end of the project (Actual rating).

8
Qualitative data was also gathered through semi-structured interview at that
time. Next steps were also agreed during that meeting.
It was agreed that evaluation with pupils would take the form of
informal discussion and a rating system (which comprised of thumbs up,
thumbs across, thumbs down). The rating system was used with pupils when
the EP (Probationer) and Assistant EP for Research met with them one week
after the Easter holidays (three weeks after completion of the project).
Long term follow up was completed 12 weeks after the project had
ended, with the Class Teacher again reflecting on where the pupils were in
relation to the original four targets she had set for the project (Long Term
Actual rating). It is important to note that, due to researcher error, the longer-
term follow up rating for the class was not collected at the same time as the
other longer-term ratings, but rather was collected approximately 18 weeks
after the project had ended (three weeks into the Summer holiday period).

3.0 Results
Over the ten week period the coaches noticed an obvious improvement
in the class in regard the targets set by pupils. The process of finding
observations to feedback to individuals became faster over the period, and
examples of goal-directed behaviour became more numerous. The only
possible exception to this related to being helpful, where the coaches found
it more challenging to find examples of goal-directed behaviour, and had to
look for these in a more focussed way. It was agreed at longer-term follow-up
that perhaps the timings of observations (start of the school day and after
lunch) did not provide the coaches with optimum opportunity to observe
being helpful. The following section describes the data collected through a
variety of methods.
3.1 Teacher Ratings
The targets set by the Class Teacher were:

9
 o Target 1: Create an ethos of the class as a team working toward
positive goals
o Target 2: Pupils show respect toward adults in the classroom
o Target 3: Improve positive relationships among peers within the class
o Target 4: Improve listening skills during whole class teaching
As mentioned in section 2.2, the Class Teacher provided ratings for the class
as a whole, on each of these targets at four points in the process. These
ratings are displayed in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Teacher ratings at Baseline, Expected, Actual and Long-term Actual

for Targets Set by Teacher

As shown in Figure 1, the Class Teacher ratings for each one of the
targets increased from Baseline to Actual. Figure 1 also shows that, for target
one, the class had met the expectations of the Class Teacher (Expected
rating). For the remaining targets the ratings had improved, but had not quite
reached the level expected by the class teacher at Baseline. At longer-term
follow up (Long-term Actual), the class had maintained the positive
improvements which were noted at evaluation (Actual rating), and in some
cases (Targets one and two), had improved further. At longer-term follow up
the class were rated as exceeding the teachers expectations at the beginning

10
of the project in regard target one, and meeting her expectations in regard
target two.

3.2 Qualitative Information

During the initial evaluation meeting the coaches asked the Class
Teacher for qualitative information about the project using an informal semi-
structured interview format. The class teacher was asked to comment on
what she had noticed in the classroom throughout the WOWW project. The
class teacher noted that the project had benefitted every pupil in the class,
with all pupils appearing motivated to work toward their goals. It also helped
the class identify what individual children are doing well. Furthermore she
reported there is more togetherness about the class and they appear to be
more willing to help each other out rather than tell tales. This in turn was said
to have had a positive impact on the amount of quality time she can spend
with the class. However, at times when the class have more freedom (e.g.
drama and gym), the impact was reported to be less.
When asked what had worked particularly well, the Class Teacher
suggested the pupils had responded particularly well to the individual
feedback from the coaches, and to the wall display she had made which
named individual children who had worked particularly hard to meet the
targets over the week. She also commented that having specific targets to
work toward worked well.
The coaches then asked if any other persons had noticed the positive
impact of the project. It was noted that the Head Teacher, Depute Head
Teacher, Behaviour Support Teacher and Pupil Support Assistant had all
noted improvements in the behaviour of the class as a whole, or individuals
within the class. The Head Teacher had noted fewer difficulties in the
playground and dining room for one pupil in particular and for the class in
general in the playground, and the Pupil Support Assistant had noted that she
was not having to respond to as much negative behaviour in the class, or in
the playground, as frequently/often as before.

3.3 Pupil Evaluation

11
 At the end of the third observation session the class set themselves
three targets:
o To be polite
o To be helpful
o To put your hand up
Figure 2 shows the ratings the pupils gave the class for each of these targets
at the end of week three, and at the end of week ten.

Figure 2: Pupil Ratings on Targets at Week 3 and Week 10.

A discussion was held with pupils three weeks after the project had officially
ended. At that time pupils were asked to indicate non-verbally how well they
thought the class had done in relation to the targets. It was stressed to the
pupils that they should consider the class as a whole when giving their
response. Pupils were asked to put their thumbs up if they thought they were
now meeting the target all of the time, thumbs across if they thought they
were meeting it some of the time and thumbs down if they thought they never
met the target. There were 25 pupils present, and the majority of pupils voted

12
for each target. Table 1 shows the percentage of pupils who voted in this way
for each target.

Thumbs Thumbs Thumbs No

Up Across Down Response
Putting Your Hand Up 33 59 0 8
Being Helpful 56 32 8 4
Being Polite 88 12 0 0
Table 1: Percentage of Pupils Voting by Target

Pupils were then given feedback from the EP (Probationer) and Assistant EP
for Research, summarising the positive changes they had observed since the
project commenced. Pupils were then asked what had helped them to meet
their targets. They stated that learning about the targets had helped them (i.e.
what it means to be helpful/polite). They also commented that the Class
Teacher had helped them, stating that the poster on the wall had been helpful,
and that she had been letting us do fun things. One pupil also stated that
they had helped each other with the targets (e.g. by telling the Class Teacher
when they had noticed another pupil being polite/helpful or putting their hand
up, so that the Class Teacher could note it on the poster.

4.0 Discussion
Overall the evaluation of the WOWW approach has been positive.
Class Teacher ratings demonstrated that the class had improved as a whole
in regard the original targets set. While the class had not achieved the
teachers expected ratings in regard some targets, they had made real
progress in comparison to ratings at baseline. For all targets the positive
change had been maintained for a period of 12 weeks following completion of
the project. The pupils also noted positive change in regard the targets they
set themselves at week three of the project.
The pupils final, non-verbal, evaluation of the project demonstrated
that they were able to identify areas of strength within the class (e.g. being
polite) vs. areas which they still had to work on (being helpful). Perhaps the
difference in how pupils rated the class on each target (thumbs up, thumbs
across, thumbs down) suggested that the pupils were thinking of themselves

13
when giving the rating, rather than the class as a whole. Or alternatively it
may have been that they were thinking of particular individuals who were not
consistently meeting the targets. It was reassuring to the authors that the
pupils were realistic in their observation that there are areas where they need
to continue develop, while recognising their success.
The authors reflect that others factors may also have contributed to the
impact of the WOWW project on the targeted areas. These may include the
work of the Behaviour Support Teacher and/or the natural maturation of the
pupils over the 10 week period. However, the researchers reflect that it is
likely that the WOWW project could explain at least a significant proportion of
the improved ratings for a number of reasons. These include the ongoing
nature of the project (i.e. pupils rated themselves daily on the targets, thus
keeping them at the forefront of their minds). Further, while it could be argued
that the pupils may have naturally matured in regard to the target behaviours,
it is worthy of note that the Class Teacher had tried a variety of approaches in
the five months prior to the project commencing, with minimal impact on
whole class behaviour. Thus it appears that the WOWW project offered a
unique contribution to resolving issues around classroom behaviour, which
were impacting on learning.
While this project achieved the aims agreed at baseline, several points
are worthy of reflection here.

4.1 Reflections on the Process

During the evaluation meeting, the Class Teacher was asked to reflect
on what could have been done better in regard the project. She suggested
that the two week absence of the EP (weeks four and five) may have meant
that the project did not move on as quickly as it might. While this may be an
accurate reflection, the researchers note that when they returned, during
week six of the project, the pupils ratings on their targets had moved up the
scale from five (being polite), five (putting your hand up) six (being helpful), to
eight, eight, nine respectively. Thus the pupils had made progress in relation
to their targets despite the absence of the coaches. Perhaps this point relates
to the class teachers reflection about the amount of consolidation work which
needed to be done in between weekly visits. It was noted that there was a

14
need to keep the project fresh throughout, and this meant introducing new
aspects, such as a poster to display the names and actions of pupils who had
worked particularly hard to meet a target during the week. While this
undoubtedly added value to the approach in this project, it was time
consuming on the part of the teacher.
At the longer-term evaluation, the Class Teacher reflected that it had
been challenging to keep the momentum of the project going after the project
had officially finished and the pupils knew the EP and Assistant EP for
Research would not be visiting again. However she commented that having
the targets to refer to had helped to refocus the class when they returned after
the Easter break, perhaps demonstrating the benefits of the project were
ongoing.
On reflection, the researchers acknowledge that it would have been
beneficial to obtain the same non-verbal data when the targets were initially
agreed during week three. However, the pupils final evaluation of the project
demonstrated that they were able to identify areas of strength within the class
(e.g. being polite) vs. areas which they still had to work on (being helpful).
Perhaps the difference in how pupils rated the class on each target (thumbs
up, thumbs across, thumbs down) suggested that the pupils were thinking of
themselves when giving the rating, rather than the class as a whole. Or
alternatively it may have been that they were thinking of particular individuals
who were not consistently meeting the targets. It was reassuring to the
researchers and class teacher that the pupils were realistic in their
observation that there are areas where they need to continue to develop,
while recognising their success. Only two pupils (8%) reported that the class
were never good at meeting the target of being helpful. The additional non-
verbal body language of these pupils at the time the ratings were being taken
suggested that they were joking around (i.e. grinning at each other and
exchanging cheeky glances).
The fact that the pupils chose slightly different targets to those of the
teacher could have caused some tension in the project. The EP (Probationer)
felt it important however, to agree initial targets for the project with the class
teacher for two reasons. Firstly, this was to provide data for evaluation (i.e.
baseline ratings). Secondly, these targets gave coaches the opportunity to

15
structure their feedback to the class e.g. well done Scott, I could tell you were
listening to the teacher because you were looking at her and sitting quietly
with your legs crossed and your hands in your lap. Thus it could be said that
the researchers scaffolded the class toward target areas. The researchers
make no apologies for this slight diversion from the standard WOWW
procedure, where initial observations are general. It was felt important,
particularly for these younger children, to structure the observations, providing
specific feedback to raise awareness of good practice in regard to
listening/working together/being respectful/being friendly. This meant that
there was some overlap between the targets identified by the pupils, and
those identified by the class teacher. Being helpful could relate to .class
as a team working toward positive goals and improve positive relationships
among peers.., putting your hand up and being polite could relate to
pupils show respect toward adults.. and improve listening skills.
One further point worthy of reflection relates to the challenges
encountered with the use of scaling with such a young age group. The
researchers tried to make the scale more accessible by incorporating a smiley
face with a thumbs up next to 10, and a sad face with a thumbs down next to
0. However, the pupils found it challenging to grasp the concept of scaling,
and the class teacher noted that she needed to revisit this in a number of
ways to consolidate the pupils understanding. Once the concept was
grasped, however, future scaling was more straightforward and successful.
While Berg and Shilts (2005) suggest ways of adapting scales for use with a
wide range of pupils, it should be noted that for young pupils, and perhaps
pupils with additional support needs, some consolidation work may need to be
completed to reinforce the concept.

4.2 Impact for the EP

The time commitments on the part of the EP (Probationer) and
Assistant EP for Research were significant. The time was in addition to the
regular visiting pattern of the EP (Probationer), as this project was agreed to
be out-with the core functions of consultation, assessment and intervention.
Thus the EP (Probationer), in addition to the Assistant EP for Research had
signed up for ten hours of working with the class spread over ten weeks, in

16
addition to additional time for meetings to plan/evaluate the project. This
proved to be a costly time commitment, and required diary flexibility on the
part of all involved. However, this commitment was made on the basis of one
of the solution-oriented principles upon which the WOWW approach is based:
No sign-up, no change. From the outset the EP (Probationer) aimed to create
a collaborative project based on the assumption that positive change was
achievable. On reflection, this positivity, and the support from the Head
Teacher, were significant factors contributing to the success of this project.
Allowing the pupils to choose their own targets, and providing individual
feedback ensured that they were signing up to the project.

4.3 The Experience of the Class Teacher

The following section was provided by the Class Teacher and represents her experience of the
project

The Class Teacher was involved in every step of the process from initial
discussions through to implementation and evaluations. The EP (Probationer)
and the Assistant EP for Research provided support throughout, especially
during their initial observations and feedback sessions. These sessions were
fundamental to the positive results achieved and enabled the children to
become more aware of their behaviour and how each could individually
improve. Giving the children individual feedback allowed them to listen to
each others comments and highlighted and modelled the positive behaviour
expected of them in the classroom. This is something which without the help
and support of the EP (Probationer) and the Assistant EP for Research would
have been difficult to achieve in the classroom.

After the initial observation sessions the children were then asked to think
about setting classroom targets. Due to the age of the children and
terminology used during discussions with the EP (Probationer) and the AEP
the children had to be supported in the classroom to develop their thinking
and help them to identify three targets which would have a positive impact on
the overall behaviour of the class.

17
The next stage involved the children rating themselves on a scale of 0 to 10
with regards to each target and again the children found this difficult and
needed support. However as the targets were discussed and scaling was
carried out on a daily basis the children soon began to understand the
process and were able to rate themselves realistically with very little support.
The children were also able to give reasons for the rating and explain how
they could improve.

The ten week project had ended just before the Easter holidays. When the
children returned to school, the WOWW principles continued to be
implemented in order to refocus the childrens attention to positive classroom
behaviour. To retain the childrens interest and positive attitude towards the
project the children were involved in discussion on new classroom targets.
These were recorded as positive individual feedback in a poster form. The
children responded very well to this and although it was time consuming it
worked well as the children responded to seeing their names displayed on the
classroom wall.

Overall this experience was a very positive one for both the children and
Class Teacher. The EP (Probationer) and the Assistant EP for Research
played an extremely important role with their weekly visits to the class
however the Class Teacher was fundamental to the success of the project as
a lot of additional time was spent during the week discussing the targets and
scaling with the children. However this was well worth the time and effort. The
knowledge and understanding to use the principles of WOWW with other
classes is now with the Class Teacher to be used throughout her teaching
career.

4.4 The Experience of the Pupils

During the evaluation session with pupils, the EP (Probationer) asked
pupils to indicate (via thumbs up, thumbs across or thumbs down) how much
they had enjoyed taking part in the project (enjoyed all the time, enjoyed
some of the time and never enjoyed it respectively). Eighty-four per cent of
pupils stated they had enjoyed the project all of the time, with 16% saying

18
they enjoyed it some of the time. This suggests that overall, the class found
the experience of WOWW to be positive. This was supported by researcher
observations the pupils always appeared happy to see them in the
classroom, greeting them by name, smiling and saying hello.
As previously stated, the Class Teacher suggested that all pupils had
benefitted from the project, not only those who had most room to develop the
target areas at the beginning of the process. The researchers reflected
throughout however, that one Primary one pupil, who had EAL, appeared to
be less engaged in the process, and did not respond to the positive modelling
of his peers in the way other pupils did. However, during the last observation
session, and since that session, that pupil has said please and thank you
when asked about his dinner choice in the morning, and the class teacher
noted an increase in his positive interactions in class since the project. Thus,
it would appear that WOWW can be a beneficial intervention for all pupils,
including those with EAL.

4.3 Next Steps

At the initial evaluation meeting some next steps were collaboratively
agreed. In particular the Class Teacher agreed to continue reviewing the
targets on a daily basis, but set new targets in collaboration with the class as
they became confident in maintaining their positive performance on the initial
targets. The Class Teacher also intended to continue with the WOWW poster
in class, but to also introduce a positive reward system for the whole class
specifically related to working hard. Finally, the Class Teacher suggested that
it would be worthwhile to involve parents in positively reinforcing the targets at
home.
At the longer-term evaluation meeting it was agreed that the ongoing
reference to the targets had helped settle the class after the Easter break, and
although the class had now set new targets, they were maintaining their
positive performance on the initial targets. Next session the class will be split
into new class groups thus it will not be possible for a direct continuation of
the project. However, the EP (Probationer) intends to liaise with both the
original Class Teacher, and the new Class Teachers, to ensure that
information about What Worked (i.e. target setting/scaling, verbal and visual

19
positive reinforcement, pupil involvement) is shared. It is also the intention of
the EP (Probationer) and Class Teacher to disseminate the findings from the
project to all school staff to demonstrate the impact which working in a
solution-oriented way, albeit using a particular approach, can have in the
classroom.

5.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, the WOWW approach had a positive impact upon the
behaviour, and relationships of pupils within the Primary one/two class. All
staff involved in the approach found the experience enjoyable, and the
majority of pupils stated it was enjoyable for all the time. Although the project
was time consuming, the authors reflect that it was a good example of early
intervention, and thus may have a longer-term impact on the teaching and
learning of that group of pupils.

20
 References

Ajmal, Y. Introducing Solution-Focused thinking. In Y. Ajmal, & I. Rees

(Eds.), Solutions in Schools (pp. 10-29). London: BT Press.

Berg, I.K. & Shilts, L. (2004). Classroom Solutions: WOWW

Approach. Milwaukee: BFTC Press.

Berg, I.K. & Shilts, L. (2005). Classroom Solutions: WOWW

Coaching. Milwaukee: BFTC Press.

Bruce, S., Mackintosh, K., & McDonald, J. (September, 2009).

WOWW. Working on What Works. Workshop presented at the Annual
Conference for Educational Psychologists in Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland.

Dunsmuir, S., Brown, E.L., Iyadurai, S., & Monsen, J. (2009).

Evidence based practice and evaluation: from insight to evaluation.
Educational Psychology in Practice, 25, 53-70.

Franklin, C., Moore, K., & Hopson, L. (2008). Effectiveness of

solution-focused brief therapy in a school setting. Children & Schools, 30, 15-
26.

Gersch, I. (2004). Educational Psychology In an Age of Uncertainty.

The Psychologist, 17, 142-145.

Kelly, M.S. & Bluestone-Miller, R. (2009). Working on What Works

(WOWW): Coaching teachers to do more of whats working. Children &
Schools, 31, 35-38.

Kelly, M.S., Kim, J.S., & Franklin, C. (2008). Solution-Focused Brief

Therapy in Schools: A 360-Degree View of Research and Practice. New
York: Oxford University Press.

21
 Kim, J.S., & Franklin, C. (2009). Solution-focused brief therapy in
schools: A review of the outcome literature. Children and Youth Services
Review, 31, 464-470.

Rees, I. (2008). A Systematic Solution-Oriented Model. In B. Kelly, L.

Woolfson, & J. Boyle (Eds.), Frameworks for Practice in Educational
Psychology (pp. 162-181). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Stearn, H. & Moore, S. (2001). Developing secondary solutions:

Educational psychologists and schools working together. In Y. Ajmal, & I.
Rees (Eds.), Solutions in Schools (pp. 163-174). London: BT Press.

Strachan, G. (2001). From the impossible to the solution. In Y. Ajmal

& I. Rees (Eds.), Solutions in Schools, (pp. 45-59). London: BT Press.

22