Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 79-99 (19%)

The Head Start Teaching Center:

An Evaluation of an Experiential, Collaborative
Training Model for Head Start Teachers
and Parent Volunteers

John fantuzzo
University of Pennsylvania

Stephanie Childs
School District of Philadelphia

Howard Stevenson
Kathleen Coyle Coolahan
Marika Ginsburg
Kristen Gay
University of Pennsylvania

Darlena Debnam
Carolyn Watson
School District of Philadelphia

Forty-eight Head Start teachers and 48 parent volunteers from 24 class

rooms were randomly assigned to either the Collaborative Training (CT) or
Workshop Training (WT) approach. CT teachers and parents were involved
conjointly in experiential training which included receiving guided practice
and feedback from exemplary peers. WT consisted of a series of workshops

This research was part of a 5-year Head Start Teaching Center demonstration grant from
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and
Families, Head Start Bureau .
We express our appreciation to Rosemary Mazzatenta, The Director of Prekindergarten
Head Start for the School District of Philadelphia, and David Silbermann, Assistant Director,
for their support and leadership during this project. Also, special acknowledgement goes to
members of the Steering Committee and the Curriculum Task Force that spent many hours
developing and reviewing facets of the training curriculum. These outstanding Head Start pro
fessionals and parent volunteers include Denota Watson, Alice Johnson, Janet Schultz, Linda
Stultz, Phillys Ditlow, Patti Blue -Williams, Janet Colaianni, Bunny Verbit, Susan Allen, Sam
Mosca, Cedric Brown, and Judy Bolton . We also thank the Head Start professionals and eval
uators of the other 13 teaching center projects who offered very helpful suggestions at
grantees meetings in Washington, DC.
Correspondence and requests for reprints should be sent to John Fantuzzo, University
of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, 3700 Walnut Street , Phil adelphia, PA
19104-6216.
79
80 Fantuzzo et al.

conducted by outside trainers for separate groups of parents and teachers.

Training methods were compared with respect to (a) teacher and parent
reports of their level of involvement in training and satisfaction with the
training experience, (b) teacher and parent reports of parent classroom
activity, and (c) observation of adult-child classroom interactions. CT
teachers and parents reported significantly greater levels of active involve
ment in and satisfaction with the training, as well as significantly greater
levels of parent classroom activity than WT participants. With respect to
adult-child classroom interactions, CT teachers demonstrated significantly
more positive initiations and praise than WT teachers. Parent reports of
their perceived role in the classroom as well as parent levels of initiation
with children did not differ between training groups. Implications of these
findings for further research were discussed.

Since 1968 Head Start and other early childhood intervention programs
have constituted the nation's leading response to childhood poverty. Embrac
ing life-span and ecological perspectives of development, Head Start has
delivered a comprehensive array of developmentally appropriate educa
tional, psychological, health, and social services to children and families in
need (Zigler & Meunchow, 1992). The challenge to provide quality services
has grown, however, as economic and social conditions in the United States
have worsened for young children and families. With one out of every four
children under the age of 6 years now Jiving in poverty and increased birth
rates for minority populations, there is a disproportionate number of poor
minority children Jiving in our most stressful urban centers (Children's
Defense Fund, 1994). These demographic and socioeconomic changes have
placed a tremendous burden on Head Start programs to keep up with the
growing needs of a very diverse, low-income population (Takanishi &
DeLeon, 1994).
Vigorous public policy debate about Head Start's efficacy in the face of
these changes has highlighted Head Start's achievements as well as its short
comings. Out of this debate has emerged consensus that if Head Start is to
meet the challenge of serving a growing population of families with diverse
needs, program quality must improve (U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, 1993; Kassebaum, 1994). Committed to improving the
quality of Head Start, Congress passed the Head Start Quality Improvement
Act in 1994, and the President formed the Advisory Committee on Head
Start Quality and Expansion.
According to expert national advisers, improving the quality of Head
Start hinges on intensifying efforts in two key areas: staff training and parent
involvement (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1993). In
service staff training has been shown to contribute to program quality and
can serve as a means for preparing teachers to function within diverse class
room environments (Epstein, 1993; Zigler & Styfco, 1994). Greater parent
 Collaborative Training 8
participation in Head Start can help to make the program more compatible
with the values and needs of the families and communities served (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, 1993). Moreover, expert
advisers have stressed that efforts to improve the quality of Head Start must
be guided by theory-based, scientific research that empirically tests the
efficacy of promising skills training methods (Zigler & Styfco, 1994).
Central to most theories of adult learning is an emphasis on the impor
tance of self-direction, active participation in learning activities, and feed
back and reflection on one's own learning (Merriam, 1987). Social learning
theory provides an excellent conceptual framework to inform the design of
skills training for adults, based on these adult learning principles (Bandura,
1977). According to social learning theory, the learning process involves a
sequence of observing a competent model, performing the observed behav
ior, and reinforcing practice of the newly learned behaviors with guided
feedback and social support.
Research supporting this theory has revealed factors that enhance both
the acquisition and performance of new skills by the learner (Kanfer &
Goldstein, 1991). Characteristics of models or exemplars, the learner, and
the learning setting all affect the learner's aquisition of new information.
Research shows that learners are more likely to imitate an exemplar whom
they perceive to be similar to themselves, in terms of gender, age, race, and
values. Observation of a similar exemplar reassures learners that the skill
being instructed is within their reach. In addition, learning is more likely to
take place when the exemplar is viewed as highly competent. However, the
exemplar's status should not be at a level that would be viewed as unrealistic
or unobtainable by the learner and thereby discourage learning. Additionally,
the exemplar should be an individual who is perceived as warm and nurtur
ing by the learner, maintains the learner's attention, and reduces the learner's
anxiety. Research has demonstrated that the learner characteristics that
most influence a learner's ability to process and retain new information
relate to the learner's level of comfort and certainty in learning situations.
Uncertain and dissatisfying experiences increase the learner's anxiety, which
in turn interferes with learning. Therefore, a learning environment should
be established that is familiar and predictable to the learner.
Regarding the performance of new skills by the learner, research indicates
that new behaviors are best adopted by learners when they are given an
opportunity to practice and receive feedback on their performance (Kanfer
& Goldstein, 1991). In addition to practice and feedback, motivational strat
egies such as social support and praise from an exemplar serve to enhance
the learner's performance of newly acquired skills. Moreover, studies reveal
that these skills are best transferred to the daily setting when opportunities
for learning in the natural environment occur. In summary, research in
social learning shows that being exposed to competent exemplars and hav
ing opportunities for practice, feedback, and social reinforcement in the
82 Fantuzzo et al.

natural setting maximize learner's performance and generalization of newly

acquired skills.
Recently, research studies have provided empirical support for teacher
training approaches in early childhood education that are based on elements
of social learning theory. Jorde-Bloom and Sheerer (1992) evaluated the
effectiveness of teacher training programs on the quality of early childhood
education. Specific components of the training included active involvement
of trainees, observation of participant progress followed by feedback from
instructors, and experiential learning activities. This model of training em
phasized the application of newly learned material and skills to real-life
classroom activities. Results indicated an increase in the teachers' level of
perceived competence and improvements in the quality of developmentally
appropriate teaching pracices, including more positive teacher-child
interactions.
Epstein (1993) also found that the quality of early childhood programs
can be increased through the improvement of in-service teacher training.
The study found that teacher training programs are most successful when
they include active participation of teachers, observation and feedback of
teaching practices by experienced mentors, and practical, hands-on learn ing.
Specific improvements in program quality included greater collaboration
among teaching staff, significant positive changes in adult-child interac
tions, and increased parent volunteer rates.
Over the past several years, there has been a strong national movement to
increase parent and teacher collaboration in early childhood education set
tings. Empirical study documents the relationship between parent involve
ment and higher academic achievement, attendance, attitudes and behavior,
rates of graduation from high school, and attendance of higher education
institutions (Becher, 1984; Henderson & Berla, 1994). In addition to pro
ducing positive outcomes for students, parent involvement in educational
settings contributes to parental and institutional growth and development
(Powell, 1989). Having parents participate in their children's education pro
vides them with opportunities to develop a greater sense of self-worth and
parental competence. Parents provide a service to educational institutions
by teaching them about the perspective and needs of the population being
serviced. In addition, parents contribute to program quality by serving as
informed consumers (Levine, 1982) and volunteers.
Head Start's emphasis on parent involvement and its inclusion of parents
in its programs has always been a core component of its model of early
childhood intervention. Incorporated in the performance standards for
Head Start (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1992b) are
activities and expectations requiring staff-parent collaboration in all pro
gram activities. The most recent advisory report on Head Start,
commissioned by the President's Advisory Committee on Head Start Quality
and Expan-
 Collaborative Training 8
sion, reasserts parent participation in "all aspects" of the program as a
primary objective for the future development of Head Start (U.S. Depart
ment of Health and Human Services, 1993).
Efforts to increase parent involvement in early childhood programs need
to consider the barriers that prevent parent-teacher collaboration. Differences
between parents and early childhood educators with respect to classroom
roles, language, and cultural background may contribute to miscom
munication and a lack of understanding between the two groups. In order
for parent-teacher partnerships to be effective, an atomosphere of mutual
respect and trust must be established, as well as opportunities for the
exchange of ideas, collaboration on goals and strategies, and joint rights and
respons ibilities (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Few models exist for
pro moting parent-teacher collaboration in early childhood education settings
(Powell, 1989). Of the programs that have been developed, efforts have
focused on incorporating parent involvement strategies into teacher training
programs (Epstein, 1993), in-service programs for teachers, and parent
workshops (Powell, 1989). In order to address barriers to parent-teacher
collaboration in early childhood settings and provide parents and teachers
with an opportunity to learn from one another, conjoint parent and staff
training needs to be investigated. To date, however, no such efforts have
been documented.
To fulfill its mandate to improve staff training, Head Start recently under
took an initiative to discover ways in which empirically validated research
theories could be translated into practice. Fourteen national demonstration
projects, called Head Start Teaching Centers, were established (U.S. Depart
ment of Health and Human Services, 1992a). Each center was charged with
designing and evaluating training methods that provided hands-on, experi
ential learning experiences for trainees.
This study reflects the initial efforts of a demonstration project that spe
cifically represents Head Start programs in large urban centers 1 In •
recogni
tion of the importance of improving staff training and enhancing parent in
volvement, the project designers created a training model based on 3 core
elements: (1) observation of exemplars, (2) guided practice and feedback in
the natural environment, and (3) the conjoint participation of parents and
teachers. Whereas previous efforts to increase parent participation in early
childhood education have focused on incorporating parent involvement
strategies in the context of teacher training programs (Epstein, 1993) or
parent workshops (Powell, 1989), this model brings parents and teachers
together to participate in a collaborative learning experience, using tech
niques derived from social learning theory.

' This research was part of an independent evaluation of the Philadelphia Head Start
Teaching Center that we conducted from the University of Pennsylvania.
84 Fantuzzo et al.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of this

experiential, exemplar-based, collaborative learning model for teachers and
parent volunteers in a large, urban Head Start program located in the north
east. The study evaluated the effectiveness of the teaching center's collabora
tive learning model by comparing it with an approach based on a more
typical workshop training model. It was hypothesized that the collaborative
learning model would result in greater levels of active involvement in train
ing, teacher-parent collaboration, satisfaction with training, and greater
levels of observed positive adult-child classroom interactions than the more
traditional workshop model. This study was motivated by the realization
that Head Start's future success depends on its ability to capitalize on the
talents of teachers and parents as they work together to provide an affirming
environment that enhances child development and builds on parental and
cultural competencies.

METHODS

Participants and Setting

Forty-eight Head Start teaching staff members (representing a population
of 308 staff members) and 48 parent volunteers participated. All partici
pants were women with the exception of one male parent volunteer and two
male teachers. Teaching staff had from 5 months to 23.5 years of experience
in early childhood education, with an average of 8 years of experience. Par
ticipants were recruited from 24 Head Start classrooms that were randomly
selected from a total of 154 classrooms in a large urban Head Start program
in the northeast. This program annually serves 2,900 low-income children
and families. The racial/ethnic breakdown of this large urban Head Start
program is 620Jo African American, 230Jo White, lOOJo Latino, 50/o Asian
American, and less than I 0/o Native American children.
Each classroom contained two teaching staff members. Two parents from
each classroom volunteered to participate in training. Parent Involvement
staff and teachers informed all parents of the parent training opportunities.
Parents who were able to make a commitment to attend all the scheduled
training sessions were selected on a first-come-first-served basis by the
Teach ing Center staff. The participating Head Start classrooms were
assigned randomly to one of two training conditions, Collaborative Training
(CT) or Workshop Training (W T ). Analyses indicated that there were no
significant group differences with respect to gender or the teaching staff
members' years of experience in early childhood education prior to training.

General Procedures
The procedures for this training evaluation study involved three steps. First,
a program-wide needs assessment was conducted to identify the training
objectives for the teaching staff and parent volunteers. Teaching staff and
 Collaborative Training 8
Table 1. Percentage of Time Allocated for Training Activities
for Collaborative and Workshop Training

Collaborative Teacher Parent

Types of Training Activities Training Workshop Workshop

Outside expert-instruction & discussion 0 75 90

Outside expert-role play 0 25 10
Exemplar-instruction & discussion 55 0 0
Exemplar-participatory/hands-on activity 45 0 0

parent needs assessments were administered to all 308 teaching staff and a
large representative group of 445 Head Start parents, who reported an
average of at least 80 volunteer hr over the course of the year. Of the teach
ing staff, 86% and of the parents, 64% who received questionnaires returned
completed questionnaires. Across both groups of respondents, promoting
developmentally appropriate adult-child interactions to enhance child self
esteem and generating a more substantive role for parents in the classroom
were identified as the two highest priority targets for training. Adult-child
interactions and parent involvement in the classroom were endorsed as the
highest training priorities by 75% and 68% of respondents, respectively.
Subsequent to identifying high-priority training needs, participating
classroom teams of teaching staff and parent volunteers were randomly
assigned to training conditions. During training, treatment integrity data
were obtained to measure adherence to the planned training agenda for each
condition. Finally, questionnaire and observational data were collected
after training was completed to evaluate the relative effectiveness of the
training approaches.

Training Interventions
Both training approaches were given the same resource allocations for train
ing and used the same needs assessment information to inform training
objectives. CT and WT training conditions involved approximately 20 hr of
training spread over a 3- to 4-month period. These allocations were in accord
with the existing standards for the larger Head Start program. Using com
parable resources provided a control for staff time and program expendi
tures across training groups and kept the development of training
innovations within the practicality of the existing fiscal resources for
training. The integ rity of the training was determined by assessing to what
degree the trainers implemented the training as planned according to the
training approach. In a sample of 36% of the training sessions, integrity
checks revealed that the training was carried out as planned 82% of the time.
Table 1 presents an overview of the three training programs: (a)
collaborative training, (b) teacher workshop training, and (c) parent
workshop training, including categories of training activity and time
allocated for each activity.
86 Fantuzzo et al.

Collaborative Training. The Collaborative Training approach had 3

distinguishing features: (I) training methods emphasized experiential, hands-
on learning activities, (2) instruction and coaching were provided by
indigenous exemplars; and (3) parent and teacher trainees participated in
training together. Nearly all of the training time was spent with parents and
teachers participating in training together. This provided both groups an
opportunity to learn about the unique perspectives of the other and experi
ence each other as persons apart from the roles of teacher and parent. Train
ing methods were experiential and included observing exemplary practices
and receiving coaching from exemplars. Exemplary practices of develop
mentally appropriate techniques were provided by experienced Head Start
teams of classroom teachers, assistants, and parents . Exemplars were staff
and parents recruited from within Head Start based on criteria developed by
a broadly based group of Head Start staff and parent leaders. Exemplary
teacher-parent teams were videotaped in their classrooms during daily
activities including breakfast time, circle time, small group activities, and
transition time. During training, participants viewed these tapes and, in
conjunction with the exemplars, identified guideline s for practices involving
developmentally appropriate adult-child interactions and teacher- parent
collaboration in the classroom. Trainees identified exemplary practices that
they wanted to adopt and practiced the new methods they learned from
exem plars and peers. Trainees were videotaped in their own classroom
settings. They examined their own practices and received feedback on
performance from co-part icipants and exemplars. The training occurred in
six training ses sions over a 12-week period. Five of the sessions were half
days, and one ses sion involved a full day of training. Training sessions were
augmented by field-based activities that were designed to enhance
participants' application of what they learned in the more structured training
sessions to their class rooms. Classroom teams from the same center attended
training together to encourage collaboration within teams as well as between
teams .
Workshop Training. The Workshop Training approach involved sepa
rate training experiences for teachers and parents. For the teachers, the train
ing consisted of a series of four full-day in-service sessions. Head Start
classroom teaching staff from a number of centers attended training as a
group. Participants attended I to 2 workshops per day focused on the same
overall training objectives as those addressed in the Collaborative Training
(i.e., developmentally appropriate practices and teacher-parent classroom
collaboration). The parent training experiences took place in parent com
munity meetings at local centers over several 2- to 3-hr sessions. All parents
at the local centers participating in this training were informed of the training
opportunities through written communications and Head Start staff
announcements. Training activities for both the teacher and parent work
shops were provided primarily by outside experts (i.e., professionals who
were not from the local Head Start center). The training activities included
 Collaborative Training 8
outside experts giving lectures, presenting materials, and leading
discussions. A small percentage of the time was allotted for role play
activities to try out some of the strategies that were presented. However,
these simulations did not involve live field-based classroom observations
and guided practice (distinguishing them from the fundamental components
of the Collabora tive Training).

Data Collection
Two sets of data were used to evaluate these training approaches: a series of
teacher and parent questionnaires and coded videotaped observations of
classroom group learning activities. Written informed consent was obtained
from participants prior to any data collection. Parent and teacher question
naires were administered to participants in each training group after all
training sessions were completed. Parents were asked to complete the Active
Involvement in Training Scale, the Training Satisfaction Scale, the Parent
Role in the Classroom Scale, and the Parent Satisfaction with Volunteer
Experience Scale. Teaching staff members were asked to complete the
Active Involvement in Training Scale, the Training Satisfaction Scale, and
the Teacher-Parent Collaboration Scale. Data collection of the classroom
observations involved obtaining a videotape of each classroom during a
group learning activity. Classroom activities were videotaped and coded if
they met the criterion of being group learning activities that normally invol
ved parent volunteers and provided frequent opportunities for adult-child
interactions. These activities were recorded for the purpose of obtaining
direct observations of adult-child interactions related to teacher-parent
identified training priorities. Videotaping was conducted after the conclusion
of training sessions in both conditions. To mitigate the reactivity of posttest
video recording, video equipment was unobtrusively set up in the classroom
and remained in place for a couple of classroom modules before it was used.

Measures
Active Involvement in Training Scale. This measure of participants'
active involvement in training was adapted from the Empowered Parent
Education Scale (Canning, 1994). The original measure, containing 15 dich
otomous items, was designed to tap perceptions of the nature and degree of
participants' involvement in parent education workshops. Items for the
Empowered Parent Education Scale were developed with a team of Head
Start parent leaders. For the purpose of evaluating the training approaches
in the study reported here, two versions of the Active Involvement in Train
ing Scales were developed, one for teaching staff and one for parent volun
teers. Both scales contained the same items; however, training sessions were
described as either "parent" or "teacher" training sessions to reflect the
different respondents.
88 Fantuzzo et al.

Respondents were asked to rate their training experience on a number of

features. A major feature of interest was the degree to which the flow of
information and input was one way (i.e., from presenter to participant) ver
sus two way (i.e., bi-directional between presenters and participants). For
example, some items asked about the degree to which respondents partic
ipated in training by sharing information and freely expressing their own
thoughts and feelings, for example, "In some parent training sessions parents
talk a lot" versus "In other parent training sessions parents talk a little."
Respondents' views about presenters' use of the expert role was assessed in
items such as, "In some parent training sessions staff 'talk at' parents"
versus "In other parent training sessions staff 'talk with' parents." The
relevance of the material presented was also rated by parent and teacher re
spondents in items such as, "Topics planned for teacher training sessions
seem very different from teachers' real worlds" versus "Topics planned for
teacher training sessions fit teachers' real worlds." Other features of train ing
rated by respondents included the presenters' interest in participants, the
degree to which the training fostered a sense of community among par
ticipants, and participants' level of active involvement in the training.
The scale was scored by assigning a point value of O to 1 to each item.
One point was assigned to responses consistent with characteristics of active
involvement in training. A maximum of 15 points could be earned on the
scale. Alpha reliability coefficients were calculated for both parent and staff
versions of the scale and were .70 and .75, respectively.
Training Satisfaction Scale. We developed this scale as a measure of
participants' satisfaction with training. Two equivalent versions of the scale
were created, one for teaching staff and the other for parent volunteers.
Both scales contained 11 items to be rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging
from "disagree strongly" to "agree strongly." Respondents were asked to
rate their training experience on its content and applicability to their work
in the classroom and personal development. For example, parents were
asked to rate the degree to which they thought the training helped them as a
classroom volunteer and provided them with skills that could help them in
getting a job. Teachers responded to items such as, "I seldom use the train
ing I received in my classroom practices" and "The training helped me as a
teacher.'' Alpha reliabilities were calculated for the teaching staff and parent
volunteer versions of the scale using the shared 11 items of the scale. The
alpha levels were .73 for the teaching staff and .70 for the parent volunteer
version of the scale.
Teacher-Parent Collaboration Scale. We created this scale to measure
teaching staff perceptions of their collaboration with parents in the class
room. The scale consists of 18 statements for which respondents are asked
to indicate their level of agreement on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from
"disagree strongly" to "agree strongly." Scale items tap topics such as
 Collaborative Training 8
teacher-parent relationships, teachers' perceptions of the value of involving
parents in the classroom, how teachers structure parent involvement in the
classroom, and level of center support for parent involvement. Respective
sample items include, "It is difficult to develop relationships with parents in
my classroom," "Having parent volunteers in school is essential," "The
role of parents in my classroom is made clear to them," and "My center
supports me in involving parents in my classroom." The alpha reliability
for this scale was .77.
Parent Affirmation Scale. This measure of parent volunteers' evaluation
of their classroom volunteer experiences was adapted from the Empowered
Parent Education Scale (Canning, 1994). The scale assesses parent volun
teers' perceptions of whether their experiences are respected by teachers and
whether they feel affirmed, supported, and actively involved in the class
room. Respondents were asked to rate whether they were actively involved
in sharing information, talking with parents and teachers, and substantively
participating in activities with children during their volunteer experiences.
The item format requires respondents to indicate which of two statements
best describes their experience as a parent volunteer, for example, "In some
classrooms, parents are not encouraged to share their talents" versus "In
other classrooms, parents are encouraged to share their talents." The scale
was scored by assigning a point value of O or 1 to each item. One point was
assigned to responses consistent with characteristics of positive volunteer
experiences in the classroom. A maximum of 15 points could be earned on
the scale. Alpha reliability was calculated to be .74.
Parent Role in the Classroom Scale. This measure of parent percep tions
of their role in the classroom was adapted from the Blueprint for Action Role
Perception Questionnaire with permission of the publisher and authors
(Jorde-Bloom, Sheerer, & Britz, 1991). The Role Perception Ques tionnaire
is a 12-item measure of teachers' perceptions of their job responsi bilities and
how their perceptions match those around them. Seven of the items from this
scale were modified and included in the Parent Role in the Classroom Scale.
The scale consists of 9 items that participants rate on a 4-point Likert scale
ranging from "disagree strongly" to "agree strongly." Questions reflect the
extent to which parent volunteers feel that their class room role and authority
are clear and congruent with their knowledge and skill level. Sample
questions include, "I have the knowledge and skills to volunteer in the
classroom," "My volunteer time rarely involves teaching children," and "I
am certain about how much authority I have in the class room ." The alpha
reliability was calculated for the scale at .68.

Adult-Child Interaction Coding System. Adult-Child interactions dur ing

a specified group classroom learning activity were coded using a contin uous
event recording system that we developed. The coding system was
90 Fantuzzo et al.

based on the Interaction Scale of the Assessment Profile for Early Child
hood Programs (Abbott-Shimm & Sibley, 1987). There were 4 global cate
gories of adult-child interaction: (1) positive initiations to children, (2)
positive responses to child initiations, (3) positive participation in group
activities, and (4) negative verbalizations. The positive initiation category
was comprised of praise, physical gestures, instruction, and verbal exchange
subcategories. Praise was operationally defined as occurrences of adult
praise, verbal or physical prompts, or encouragement to continue a desired
activity. Physical gestures included adult-initiated hugs, pats, or holds.
Instruction was defined as an initial behavioral request directed toward the
group or individual students to engage in a desired activity. A verbal
exchange was coded when an adult initiated conversation with a child, and
the child responded verbally. The second global category, positive responses
to child initiations, was defined as adult responses to children's statements
with a verbal response or physical gesture. Positive participation in group
activity was coded for any adult who participated in the children's activities
such as circle time or small group activities. Negative verbalizations were
coded when adults yelled, scolded, criticized, threatened, or spoke
sarcastically to a child or children. 2
A 20-min sample of the activity was coded for each classroom. Two inde
pendent raters, who were blind to the classrooms' training assignments,
were used to code videotapes of the classroom activities. Codes were assigned
to all adults in the classroom, that is, teachers and parent volunteers. Teach ing
staff and parent volunteer rates for each observational code were calcu lated by
tallying the number of occurrences for each code during the 20- min time
frame. Using a sample of 170/o of the videotapes, interrater reliability was
calculated for rate of agreement for each category and subcategory and ranged
from 940/o to 1000/o, with an average of 980/o agreement per category.

Data Analysis
The relative efficacy of CT and WT training interventions was assessed
using a posttest-only control group design (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). This
design strategy was to compare the effectiveness of the existing workshop
approach (WT) with the CT approach designed for the Head Start Teaching
Center Demonstration Project. Pretest questionnaires on training and a
pretest set of videotaped classroom observations were not included because
of their potential reactive effects. Therefore, 24 representative Head Start
classrooms were randomly assigned to CT or WT training conditions. Train
ing resources and training time were controlled across conditions and class
room observational data, and questionnaires were collected posttraining.
Three sets of analyses were conducted to evaluate training effects. The first

' The complete detailed coding procedure can be obtained by contacting the first author.
 Collaborative Training 9
set focused on parent and teacher reports of their level of involvement in
training and their satisfaction with the training experience. The second set
consisted of reports of parent and teacher classroom activity. The final set
involved the adult-child classroom interactions. A one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) statistical procedure was used to determine group dif
ferences on teacher and parent questionnaires. The Bonferroni correction
was used for each individual ANOVA (O! = .0125 per dependent variable) to
reduce the likelihood of making a Type I error. ANOVAs were computed on
the major observational categories of adult-child interactions, and a multiple
analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to evaluate group differences on
subcategories of adult initiations. To avoid any violations of the ANOVA
independence assumption, the classroom served as the unit of analysis.
Because teams of two teachers and two parents participated in training
together, an average of the teacher dyad and parent dyad was computed for
the separate teacher and parent questionnaire analyses. Additionally, class
room interactions were summed separately for teachers and parents in the
classroom.

RESULTS
Reports on Training
Table 2 provides a summary of posttraining means, standard deviations,
and F ratios on reports of level of involvement in training and satisfaction
with training for parents and teachers in the two training conditions.
Teachers in the CT group reported significantly higher levels of active
involvement in training than the teachers in the WT. Parents in the CT group
also reported levels of active involvement that exceeded the levels reported
by the parents in the WT group. Comparison between the two groups with
respect to satis faction with training indicated that both parents and teachers
in the CT group reported significantly greater levels of satisfaction with
training than the participants in the WT group.

Reports on Classroom Involvement

Table 3 displays the descriptive statistics and F ratios on teacher reports of
teacher-parent classroom collaboration for CT and WT groups. One-way
ANOVA on posttraining ratings indicated that the teachers in the CT group
reported significantly higher levels of collaborative classroom activity
between teachers and parent volunteers. Group means and standard
deviations of parent reports of affirmation and their perceived role in the
classroom are also presented in Table 3. Parents who participated in the CT
condition reported higher levels of teacher support and affirmation than
parents in the WT condition. However, no significant differences were found
between groups in parents' reports of their perceived role in the classroom.
Table 2. Comparison Between Collaborative and Workshop Training
on Average Scores of Active Involvement and Satisfaction with Training Experiences

Collaborative Workshop
Scales Training Training F Ratio

Active involvement in training

Teacher"
M 28.14 24.65 12.97*
SD 1.96 3.01
Parentb
M 28.25 26.05 12.68*
SD 1.57 1.17
Satisfaction with training
Teacher
M 31.42 28.96 10.83*
SD 2.02 1.62
Parent
M 35.20 31.70 8.50*
SD 2.46 1.38

• Teacher analyses were based on 24 and 23 dyads for satisfaction and involvement,
respectively.
b Parent analyses were based on 20 dyads; data from two classrooms in each group were
incomplete.
• p< .0125.

Table 3. Comparison Between Collaborative and Workshop Training

on Average Scores of Teacher Report of Collaboration
and Parent Evaluation of Volunteer Experience

Collaborative Workshop
Scales Training Training FRatio

Teacher-parent collaboration
M 62.36 57.18 12.40*
SD 3.91 2.92
Parent involvement in classroom
M 28.06 24.85 8.5I•
SD 1.17 2.65
Parent role in the classroom
M 28.72 29.25 0.18
SD 2.77 2.60

• Teacher analyses were based on 24 dyads.

Parent analyses were based on 19 dyads for involvement (9 CT, 10 WT) and 18 dyads for
b
role (8 CT, 10 WT). End of the year and moves made it difficult to collect all of the parent data
for classroom dyads.
* p< .0125.

92
Collaborative Training 9
Table 4. Comparison Between CT and WT Training on Average Number
of Adult-Child Interactions

Collaborative Workshop
Observational Categories Training• Training F Ratio

Participation in group activity

Teacher
M 47.50 34.90 1.50
SD 21.96 24.02
Parent
M 22.60 14.40 0.47
SD 32.52 19.00
Total
M 70.10 49.30 1.58
SD 48.01 21.02
Responses to child initiations
Teacher
M 2.80 5.70 3.54
SD 2.00 4.45
Parent
M 0.30 2.20 1.64
SD 0.67 4.63
Total
M 3.10 7.90 12.81•
SD 2.13 3.67

• Analyses were conducted with 20 classrooms (10 per group). Data from two classrooms
per group were not available because of undetected technical problems with video recording
and unexpected teacher medical leaves.
• p< .0125.

Adult-Child Classroom Interactions

Group means, standard deviations, and F ratios for teacher, parent, and
adult totals (teacher+ parent) are presented in Table 4 for the participation
in group activity and responses to child initiations categories of positive
adult child interactions. Because no negative adult verbalizations were
observed, this category was not helpful in evaluating group differences.
Although CT adults evidence higher mean levels of participation in group
activities with children, these differences were not statistically significant for
teachers, parents, or the total. The adult response data showed that the
participants in the WT engaged in a significantly greater total of responses to
children's initiations than did the CT group members.
Table 5 presents summary statistics for the four subcategories of positive
initiations to children. MANOVAs on these subcategories were computed
for total adult occurrences, teacher, and parent indicating significant group
differences for total, F (4, 15) = 3.3, p< .05, and teacher, F (4, 15) = 3.75,
p< .05, comparison only. Univariate analyses of group differences for the
Table 5. Mean Number of Observed Adult Initiations to Children
for Learning Center and Traditional Training Groups

Collaborative Workshop Univariate

Observational Categories Training• Training FRatio

Praise
Teacher
M 6.60 3.10 I0.67**
SD 2.59 2.18
Parent
M 0.30 1.30 1.50
SD 0.67 2.50
Total
M 6.90 4.40 5.66*
SD 2.76 1.84
Physical Gestures
Teacher
M 6.80 1.40 2.61
SD 10.35 2.17
Parent
M I.JO 0.30 1.13
SD 2.28 0.67
Total
M 7.90 1.70 3.53
SD 10.16 2.36
Instruction
Teacher
M 10.90 8.80 0.59
SD 5.32 6.78
Parent
M 0.50 1.60 1.02
SD 0.71 3.37
Total
M 11.40 I0.40 0.19
SD 5.13 5.10
Verbal Exchanges
Teacher
M 14.70 10.40 1.53
SD 7.72 7.82
Parent
M 0.20 0.60 0.80
SD 0.63 1.26
Total
M 14.90 11.00 1.38
SD 7.81 7.00

a Analyses were conducted with 20 classrooms (IO per group). Data from two classrooms
per group were not available because of undetected technical problems with video recording
and unexpected teacher medical leaves.
*p<.05. ** p< .01.

94
 Collaborative Training 9
praise, physical gestures, instruction, and verbal exchange subcategories
revealed that the total number of occurrences of adults praising children
was significantly greater for the CT group than the WT group. This again
was because of a significantly higher level of teacher praise. There were no
significant differences between the relatively low levels of parent praise in
both groups. Furthermore, there were no significant group differences
found in the amount of adult-child, physical gestures, instruction, or verbal
exchange for teacher, parent, or total comparisons.

DISCUSSION
Head Start, in order to meet the growing challenges it faces, must discover
effective and cost-efficient ways to enhance the skills of Head Start teachers
and to more substantially involve parents in classroom learning experiences.
Toward this end, the study presented here represents initial steps in the
evaluation of a collaborative training model (CT) that involved having
parents and teachers co-participate in experiential training based on social
learning theory. Controlling for cost and time parameters, this collabora tive
training approach was compared with a more traditional workshop approach
that was in place in a large urban Head Start Program at the time of the
study (WT). Based on a comprehensive assessment of the training needs of
Head Start teachers and parent volunteers, the objectives for train ing were to
improve the quality of adult-child classroom interactions and to increase
teacher-parent collaboration. The relative effectiveness of CT versus the
existing WT training was addressed by 3 primary evaluation questions: (1)
Do CT participants report more active involvement in train ing and greater
satisfaction with training than WT participants? (2) In the classroom, do CT
training experiences result in more teacher-parent collab oration, parent
affirmation, and clearer and more congruent roles for parents than WT
experiences? and (3) Do CT trainees evidence higher levels of
developmentally appropriate adult-child classroom interactions than WT
trainees?
Evaluation findings for Head Start teachers showed that, compared with
teachers who received the traditional training, teachers in the CT group
were more actively involved in their training and more satisfied with it. The
active CT training components (i.e., observation of exemplars, guided prac
tice, and immediate feedback, coupled with receiving training with parents)
fostered more active participation and resulted in a more enjoyable learning
experience than was found with a more traditional workshop format. More
over, this training process was associated with positive classroom outcomes.
Posttraining, teachers in the CT group reported higher levels of teacher
parent classroom collaboration than teachers in the WT group. Observa
tional data indicated that CT training had a greater positive impact on
 9 Fantuzzo et

teacher-child classroom interactions than WT training. Overall, teachers

were making more frequent initiations to children in the CT group, whereas
teachers in the WT group were more likely to be responding to children's
initiations and initiating less themselves. Specifically, teachers in the CT
group praised children significantly more often than teachers who had
received the more traditional training.
These findings are in accord with findings from research on in-service
training models, like CT, that required trainees to be actively involved in
experiential training related directly to their early childhood professional re
sponsibilities. Jorde-Bloom & Sheerer (1992) found that a training interven
tion for Head Start staff that gave trainees an active role in the training
experience and provided direct on-site supervision in the trainees' local site
resulted in increased levels of perceived competence and greater quality of
teaching practices compared with those who did not receive the training.
Epstein (1993) discovered that an in-service training approach that used
exemplary, in-house trainers, emphasized active participation, gave direct
feedback of classroom applications, and provided opportunities for trainees
to network and share experiences resulted in the highest levels of develop
mentally appropriate adult-child classroom interactions and the most positive
developmental outcomes.
The study present here extends the early childhood in-service training
research by providing data on the integrity of the training interventions and
by investigating the impact of conjoint training for teachers and parents on
satisfaction with training, active involvement in training, and classroom
collaboration. Empirical documentation substantiating that the training
interventions were carried out as planned increases our confidence that the
present findings were attributable to the implemented intervention compo
nents (Gresham, Gansle, & Noell, 1993). Findings revealed that the
collabora tive training experience was associated with higher levels of
satisfaction and involvement for both teachers and parents than those
reported by WT par ticipants. Moreover, both teachers and parents in the CT
group reported more positive classroom outcomes for parents than WT
trainees. This train ing approach provided teachers and parents with more
opportunities for working together in the classroom than the comparison
approach did.
Although the findings for parent participants were not as clear as those
for teachers, they contribute to our understanding of parent involvement in
classroom learning activities. Like the teachers, the parents in the CT train
ing reported that they were more actively involved in the training and were
more satisfied with the training than their counterparts in the WT group.
Furthermore, parents in the CT group reported higher levels of teacher
affirmation and support in the classroom than parents in the WT group.
This finding corroborates the CT teachers' report of higher levels of teacher
parent classroom collaboration. However, there were no group differences
 Collaborative Training 9
in parent-child classroom interactions or differences in parents' perceptions
of the clarity and congruence of their role in the classroom. Despite reports
of active and satisfying training experiences and feelings of higher levels of
support and respect from teachers in the classroom, parents in the CT train
ing group did not perceive their role in the classroom to be any more clear
and congruent with their skills and interests than did parents in the compar
ison group. Moreover, parents in the CT group evidenced the same low
rates of adult-child initiations (praise, physical contact, instruction, conver
sation) as parents in the comparison group. Although CT parents evidenced
greater levels of classroom collaboration with teachers than parents in the
WT group, their involvement in classroom activities was not observed to
include significantly greater amounts of interaction with children.
Three possibilities exist for explaining these equivocal findings with
respect to parents' perceptions of classroom roles and rates of adult-child
interaction. First, actual posttraining differences may have existed between
the CT and WT training groups that were not detected. The absence of pre
test assessments may have decreased the likelihood of detecting group dif
ferences. Pretesting would have identified any pretraining differences in
groups (as a result of random assignment) and allowed for these inadvertent
differences to be controlled statistically with an analysis of covariance pro
cedure. A second possibility is that parent perceptions of role and parent
child classroom interactions were assessed too soon after the training.
Assuming that CT parents' greater levels of active involvement in the train
ing, satisfaction with training, and collaboration with teachers were the
result of the type of training they received, it is possible that changes in their
role perceptions and interactions with children might have emerged later.
Follow-up observations could be employed to shed further light on this
question. A third possiblity is that increasing teacher-parent collaboration
in the classroom is necessary but not sufficient for enhancing parents' in
volvement with children in the classroom, and that a more direct focus on
this issue is called for in the training. Further exploration of all three possi
bilities is needed and can be built into future research designs.
Consistent with enhancing the collaboration component of the CT
training approach would be considering ways to strengthen the effectiveness
of the exemplars. According to social learning theory, an exemplar's
effectiveness is a direct function of the learner's perception of the exemplar's
competence, similarity to the learner, and warmth. Future studies could
increase the ef fectiveness of the exemplar by assessing trainee's perceptions
of exemplars. This initial evaluation suggests that the experiental,
collaborative training approach developed for this large, urban Head Start
program holds promise as a strategy for raising the quality of Head Start
services and increasing parental involvement. A revised curriculum should
consider ways to secure a higher and more consistent percentage of
participatory training activity,
9 Fantuzzo et

more specific exemplar demonstrations of developmentally appropriate

adult-child classroom initiations (especially in areas where there were no
differences: physical gestures, verbal exchange, and instruction), and a
greater emphasis on the development of clearly defined classroom roles for
parents. Having parents and Head Start staff learn together how to create a
more affirming learning community is Head Start's best hope for affecting
teacher, parent, and child efficacy.

REFERENCES
Abbott-Shim, M., & Sibley, A. (1987). Assessment profile for early childhood programs.
Atlanta, GA: Quality Assist.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Becher, R. (I 984). Parent involvement: A review of research and principles of successful prac
tice. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for
research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Canning, S.S. (1994). Empowered parent education: An empirical investigation of empower
ment concepts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Phila
delphia.
Children's Defense Fund. (1994). The state of America's children. Washington, DC.
Epstein, A.S. (1993). Training for quality: Improving early childhood programs through
sys tematic inservice training. (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational
Foundation No. 9). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.
Gresham, F.M., Gansle, K.A., & Noell, G.H. (1993). Treatment integrity in applied behavior
analysis with children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 257-263.
Henderson, A.T., & Berla, N. (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to
student achievement. Washington, DC: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Jorde-Bloom, P., & Sheerer, M. (1992). The effect ofleadership training on child care pro gram
quality. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 579-594.
Jorde-Bloom, P., Sheerer, M., & Britz, J. (1991). Blueprint for action: Achieving center-based
change through staff development. Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons.
Kanfer, F., & Goldstein, A. (1991). Helping people change. New York: Pergamon.
Kassebaum, N.L. (1994). Head Start: Only the best for America's children. American Psychol
ogist, 49, 123-126.
Levine, J.A. (1982). The prospects and dilemmas of child care information and referral. In
E.F. Zigler & E.W. Gordon (Eds.), Day care: Scientific and social policy issues
{pp. 378-401). Boston: Auburn House.
Merriam, S.B. (1987). Adult learning and theory building: A review. Adult Education Quarterly,
37, 187-198.
Powell, D.R. (1989). Families and early childhood programs (Research Monographs of the
National Association for the Education of Young Children, Vol. 3). Washington, DC:
National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Takanishi, R., & DeLeon, P.H. (1994). A Head Start for the 21st century. American Psychol
ogist, 49, 120-122.
U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Strong families, strong schools: Building community
partnerships for learning. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and
Families (1992a). Head Start Teaching Centers, Federal Register, 57, 24861-24862.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
 Collaborative Training 9
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and
Families (I 992b). Head Start program performance standards (DHHS Publication No.
ACF 92-31131). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth, and
Families (1993). Creating a 21st century Head Start: Final report of the advisory com
mittee on Head Start quality and expansion. Washington, DC: Administration on Chil
dren, Youth, and Families.
Zigler, E., & Meunchow, S. (1992). Head Start: The inside story of America's most successful
educational experiment. New York: Basic.
Zigler, E., & Styfco, S.J. (1994). Head Start: Criticisms in a constructive context. American
Psychologist, 49, 127-132.