Educational Psychology in Practice

Vol. 28, No. 1, March 2012, 19–30

Working on What Works: working with teachers to improve

classroom behaviour and relationships
Emma L. Browna*, Emma Powella and Adele Clarkb
a
Aberdeen City Educational Psychology Service, Aberdeen, UK; bSkene Square Primary
School, Aberdeen, UK

The Working on What Works (WOWW) approach, which is based upon Solu-
tion-focused Brief Therapy, was implemented in a mainstream primary class-
room over a 10-week period. The focus was on improving behaviour and
relationships in class. Results demonstrated an improvement in teacher ratings
for targets set by the class teacher compared with baseline. Pupils also set, and
rated themselves on class targets. Observation of pupils, and their class-ratings,
demonstrated a positive impact for these targets. Longer term follow-up sug-
gested that this positive impact was maintained. It is concluded that WOWW
had a positive impact on behaviour and relationships within this classroom.
Keywords: solution-oriented; solution-focused; classroom behaviour; classroom
relationships; Working on What Works

Introduction
Sheldon and King (2001) suggest that normal human functioning cannot be
accounted for within a purely problem-focused frame of reference. Sheldon and
King argue that such a focus is too restrictive, and one reason why psychologists
know so little about human thriving and how to encourage it. Over the past decade,
some educational psychologists (EPs) have become increasingly interested in adopt-
ing an explicit focus on solutions when working with children, young people, fami-
lies and schools. In particular, Solution-focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) is an
approach which is being used by EPs (Stobie, Boyle, & Woolfson, 2005).
SFBT is a therapeutic approach developed by de Shazer and colleagues which
focuses on change and hope, investigating solutions to problems, rather than analys-
ing the problem itself (cited in Ajmal, 2001). Rees (2008) and Ajmal (2001) state
that an EP working in a solution-focused/oriented way will be applying the follow-
ing principles: identifying the client’s strengths; exploring exceptions to the problem
situation (to build on what is already working); exploring the goal state; investigat-
ing who can help in reaching the goal state; identifying the first step towards the
goal state, and generally facilitating thinking about possible solutions.
There are a number of examples of solution-focused methodologies being used
effectively with individuals (for example, Franklin, Moore, & Hopson, 2008;
Strachan, 2001), in meetings with groups of professionals (for example, Harker,
2001), with families (for example, Mall & Stringer, 2001), and with schools (for
example, Stearn & Moore, 2001).

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0266-7363 print/ISSN 1469-5839 online

Ó 2012 Association of Educational Psychologists
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2011.639347
http://www.tandfonline.com
20 E.L. Brown et al.

The principles of SFBT have been adapted and incorporated into a variety of
approaches. One practical application of these principles in the classroom is the
Working on What Works (WOWW) approach (Berg & Shilts, 2004, 2005).
WOWW originated in Florida from a discussion about an individual pupil being
taught by Shilts’s wife. A solution-focused discussion between Shilts, his wife and
Insoo Kim Berg led to an observation by Shilts and Berg in the classroom and posi-
tive feedback to the child whose behaviour was causing concern (highlighting posi-
tives from observation, for example, concentrating on work, being polite). This
relatively minor intervention had a considerable impact on the young person and
led Shilts to trial a wider approach of observation and positive feedback in the
classroom and school. This led to a decrease in absences, improved academic out-
comes and a decrease in referrals to counsellors. Berg and Shilts developed the
WOWW approach from this initial intervention, incorporating more solution-focused
elements in the process (Shilts, 2008). Berg and Shilts (2005) state that their model
emerged through repeated observations of what worked and what did not work,
removing the elements that did not work and developing those that did.
WOWW focuses on the solution-focused principles of: looking for exceptions to
problem situations (times when the problem situation is less problematic, or the
problem does not exist); working on what already is working (maintaining and
building on existing good practice); and believing that change is constant and inevi-
table and that professionals should always be looking for small, positive changes
which can be built on to bring about bigger change – the “snowball effect” (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:

• Stage one: Observation (three weeks) (Kelly, Kim, & Franklin, 2008). The
WOWW “coach” (someone external to the classroom) observes the class
looking for positive things to feedback to the pupils and class teacher (CT).
Following the observation each pupil is given individual feedback about one
positive thing the observer noticed. Berg and Shilts (2005) state time should
be taken to give the CT his/her feedback after class.
• Stage two: The WOWW coaches facilitate discussion to set collaborative (tea-
cher and pupil) classroom goals (around weeks four/five). These goals are then
scaled by the pupils and CT on a scale from one to 10. The rating provided
should take into consideration the class as a whole, rather than individual
pupils. The class is asked what it would take to move one point up the scale.
• Stage three: Regular scaling of classroom success and amplifying (Kelly
et al., 2008). The goals set in stage two are the focus of observer feedback
during the remaining WOWW sessions. Between sessions the CT should
work with the pupils to scale themselves daily to amplify change (by high-
lighting progress to be built upon).

At each stage observation should be once weekly, lasting around 40 minutes, with
15 minutes for feedback (and discussion from stage two onwards) (Berg & Shilts,
2005; Kelly & Bluestone-Miller, 2009).
 Educational Psychology in Practice 21

Evidence base
There are currently few published studies reporting on the effectiveness of WOWW
(Berg & Shilts 2004, 2005; Kelly & Bluestone-Miller, 2009). Initial findings sug-
gest WOWW 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 teachers’ perceptions of: pupil
behaviour (some students thinking before they act, being calmer and more on task);
respect toward the teacher (being polite); and student’s pride in their work as
assessed through teacher discussions and coach’s observations. The authors note
that this project took place over a year which is a big time commitment for the coa-
ches. It is questionable whether Educational Psychology Service (EPS) models of
service delivery would be flexible enough to support weekly intervention over this
time period if an EP were to act as a coach.
Kelly and Bluestone-Miller (2009) report that in a pilot study of WOWW (with
21 teachers in five schools), results indicated an increase in teachers’ perceptions of
their classes as better behaved, of themselves as effective classroom managers, and
an increase in the teachers’ sense that pupils would view themselves as better
behaved. No reference is made in this study to the time frame for intervention.
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 sufficient variability in ratings over time. Further, there are no
data regarding how pupils experienced the approach, pupils’ perception of change,
or evidence of longer term impact. Thus the three published studies to date have
limitations; however the results suggest that adopting the WOWW approach led to
positive change, and therefore it is worthy of further investigation.
In Scotland Moray EPS and Inclusion Support Outreach Service have introduced
WOWW as part of a wider drive toward Solution Oriented Schools (Bruce, Mackin-
tosh, & McDonald, 2009). Bruce et al. evaluated the approach in seven classrooms,
where the approach was used for 10 weeks. In a change to the standard Berg and
Shilts (2005) method, positive feedback was provided to the teacher in the presence
of the pupils. No rationale was provided for this alteration in the procedure. Semi-
structured focus groups were held with 77 pupils. Results indicated that pupils gener-
ally rated WOWW sessions as positive, and enjoyed hearing the feedback (both to
themselves, and to their teacher). In addition the majority of pupils suggested their
class had improved as a result of the programme, and they now regarded their tea-
cher in a more positive manner. Responses from teacher questionnaires (N = 7)
revealed that WOWW had benefitted both their own practice, and their perception of
the behaviour/attitude of pupils. Teachers also reported that hearing feedback about
themselves was primarily positive. The authors note that the questionnaire provided
to teachers afforded the opportunity for rich qualitative data to be obtained. One lim-
itation to this study is the lack of longer term evaluation. It is unclear whether the
positive impact was sustained after the intervention had completed.

The current study

The current study emerged through consultation with a head teacher and CT (third
author) around the relationships between, and behaviour of, pupils in a primary
one/two composite class (aged 5–6 years). It was agreed that WOWW would be an
22 E.L. Brown et al.

appropriate intervention to target the areas of concern in the classroom. The work
also fitted well with the local, and national drive to embed solution-oriented practice
into classrooms.
The aim of the project was to improve the behaviour and relationships in the
class through collaborative working with school staff and pupils.

Methodology
Participants
The 25 pupils who participated in this project were aged between five years one
month and six years three months at the time the project commenced. Written per-
mission for participation was obtained from the parent of each child prior to the pro-
ject commencing. Adult teaching staff included the CT, a pupil support assistant and
a depute head teacher who covered the class during the CT’s 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 CT.
The coaches/facilitators were the first two authors of this paper, the school’s des-
ignated EP, and an assistant EP for research.

Process and data collection

The approach followed the format set out by Berg and Shilts (2005), with the adapta-
tions made by Bruce et al. (2009) being incorporated (teacher feedback in class, inter-
vention over 10 weeks). At a planning meeting with the head teacher and the CT, the
CT provided information about what she hoped would be achieved through participa-
tion in WOWW. This information was translated into four targets and recorded on a
Target Monitoring and Evaluation (TME) form (adapted from Dunsmuir, Brown,
Iyadurai, & Monsen, 2009). The CT rated the class on a scale from one to 10 on the
four targets set (baseline rating). This rating was based on her perception of the
proportion of time the target would be met in class, and/or the proportion of pupils in
the class who would regularly meet that target. In line with solution-oriented scaling,
the CT 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).
During the initial period of observation (weeks one to three), the focus of observa-
tion and feedback was on the four targets set by the CT during planning. At the end of
week three the coaches, in collaboration with the CT, asked the class to set themselves
goals/targets to work toward. The class agreed three targets which were then each
rated on a scale from one to 10 (with some visual support). A discussion followed
about what would help the class to move up the scale. The CT consolidated the pupils’
understanding and experience of using the targets and scaling over a two week period
when the observation/feedback could not go ahead due to illness of the EP. The class
scaled themselves daily for each target, and the CT reminded them of the targets
regularly throughout the day. During weeks 6 to 10 of observation/feedback the
weekly sessions re-commenced, with the focus being on the class targets and scaling.
Throughout the 10-week period, observations were recorded by the WOWW
coaches using an observation schedule where each child’s name was noted
alongside space for the observation, and a space to indicate which target was being
met in the observation recorded.
 Educational Psychology in Practice 23

Following the 10-week intervention the coaches met with the head teacher and
CT to evaluate the project. The CT was asked to reflect on the original four targets,
and to provide a rating on the 10-point scale, based on her perception of where the
class were at the end of the project (actual rating). Qualitative data was also gathered
through semi-structured interview at that time. This interview asked the following:

• What have you noticed?

• What has worked particularly well?
• Who else has noticed?
• What could have been done better?

Next steps were agreed during that meeting.

It was agreed that evaluation with pupils would take the form of informal
discussion and ratings three weeks post-intervention.
Longer term follow-up data was collected 12 weeks post-intervention, with the
CT again reflecting on where the pupils were in relation to the original four tar-
gets she had set pre-intervention (long-term actual rating). The longer term follow-
up rating for target four was collected approximately 18 weeks after the project
had ended.

Teacher ratings
The four targets set by the CT were:

(1) Create an ethos of the class as a team working toward positive goals
(2) Pupils show respect toward adults in the classroom
(3) Improve positive relationships among peers within the class
(4) Improve listening skills during whole class teaching

The CT rated the whole class on each of these targets at four points in the process.
These ratings are displayed in Figure 1.

Results
The following section describes the data collected through a variety of methods.
As shown in Figure 1, the ratings for each target increased from baseline to
actual. For target one, the class met the expectations of the CT (expected rating)
immediately post-intervention. At longer term follow-up (long-term actual rating),
the class maintained the positive improvements noted immediately post-intervention
(actual rating), and in some cases (targets one and two), had improved further. At
longer term follow-up the class was rated as exceeding the teacher’s expectations
with regard to target one, and meeting her expectations with regard to target two.
For the remaining targets, while the ratings improved, they did not reach the level
expected by the CT at baseline.

Qualitative information
During the initial evaluation meeting the CT provided qualitative data via an
informal semi-structured interview. Salient points from this interview were
24 E.L. Brown et al.

10

7
Baseline
6
Rating

Expected

5 Actual
Long-term Actual
4

1
Class Working as Respect toward Positive Listening skills
Team adults relationships
between peers
Target Set by Teacher

Figure 1. Teacher ratings at baseline, expected, actual and long-term actual for targets set
by teacher.

summarised by the WOWW coaches and clarified with the CT to be a true rep-
resentation of the interview and her thoughts. When asked what she had noticed
in the classroom throughout the WOWW project, the CT commented that
WOWW had benefited every pupil in the class, with all pupils appearing moti-
vated to work toward their goals. Furthermore, the CT commented that WOWW
helped the class identify what individual children were doing well, and there
was said to be more togetherness about the class, with pupils appearing more
willing to help each other out rather than “tell tales”. The CT reported that the
intervention had a positive impact on the amount of quality time she could
spend with the class. However, at times when the class had more freedom (for
example, drama and gym), the impact was reported to be less.
When asked what had worked particularly well, the CT suggested that the
pupils had responded particularly well to the individual feedback from the coa-
ches, and to the wall display she had made which named individual children
who had worked particularly hard to meet class targets over the week. She also
commented that having specific targets to work towards worked well.
The coaches then asked if any other people had noticed the positive impact
of the project. The head teacher, depute head teacher, behaviour support teacher
and pupil support assistant were said to have noted improvements in the behav-
iour of the class as a whole, or individuals within the class. The head teacher
commented that for one particular pupil there were fewer difficulties in the play-
ground and dining room, and fewer difficulties reported for the whole class in
the playground. The pupil support assistant had noted that she was not having
to respond to negative behaviour in the class, or the playground, as frequently
as before.
 Educational Psychology in Practice 25

Pupil evaluation
At the end of the third observation session the class had set itself three targets:

• To be polite
• To put your hand up
• To be helpful

Figure 2 shows the ratings the pupils gave the class for each of these targets at the
end of week 3, and at the end of week 10. An increase in ratings was evident at
week 10 for all three targets.
The WOWW coaches had discussed with the CT and head teacher the most
appropriate method of gathering the views of the pupils. Pupils were familiar with
non-verbal rating as part of self-assessment, and therefore it was agreed to follow
this approach in pupil evaluation. Three weeks post-intervention, pupils were asked
to indicate non-verbally how well they thought the class had done in relation to the
targets. Pupils were asked to put their thumbs up if they thought the class was now
meeting the target all of the time, thumbs across if they thought the class was
meeting it some of the time and thumbs down if they thought the class never met
the target. Table 1 shows the percentage of pupils who voted in this way for each
target.

10

6
Rating

Week 3

5 Week 10

1
Being Polite Putting Your Hand Being Helpful
Up
Targets Set by Pupils

Figure 2. Pupil ratings on targets at week 3 and week 10.

Table 1. Percentage of pupils voting by target (N = 25).

Thumbs up Thumbs across Thumbs down No response
Being polite 88 12 0 0
Putting your hand up 33 59 0 8
Being helpful 56 32 8 4
26 E.L. Brown et al.

In discussion the WOWW coaches also sought pupils’ views as to what helped
them meet their targets. Pupils stated that learning about the targets had helped
them (for example, what it means to be polite), and that the poster on the wall had
been helpful. One pupil stated they had helped each other with the targets (for
example, by telling the CT when they had noticed another pupil being polite/helpful
or putting their hand up).

Observation
While conducting the classroom observations during weeks 1–10 the WOWW coa-
ches noticed that the process of identifying positive feedback for each pupil became
quicker and easier as the amount of observable target-related behaviour appeared to
increase. Whilst this information was not formally documented, the authors dis-
cussed this informally throughout the project, and the observation fits well with the
improvements noted by the CT and pupils.

Discussion
Overall the evaluation of the WOWW approach was positive. The CT’s ratings sug-
gested that the class had improved as a whole with regard to the original targets
set. While the class had not achieved the CT’s expected ratings in regard to some
targets, it had made real progress in comparison to ratings at baseline. For all tar-
gets the perception of the CT was that positive change had been maintained for a
period of 12 weeks post-intervention. The pupils also noted positive change with
regard to the targets they set themselves at week three of the project. The pupils’
final, non-verbal, evaluation of the project demonstrated they were able to identify
areas of strength within the class (for example, being polite) versus areas which
they still had to work on (being helpful). The WOWW coaches reflected that “being
helpful” was the target for which they found it most challenging to find examples
of goal-directed behaviour. 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 findings from the current project contribute to the evidence base that exists
around WOWW as a solution-focused classroom approach which can impact
positively on pupil behaviour, relationships and respect in school (see also Berg &
Shilts, 2004, 2005; Bruce et al., 2009; Kelly & Bluestone-Miller, 2009).

Factors contributing to positive outcomes

The authors reflect that a number of factors contributed to the success of this
intervention. These include:

• Sign up and commitment from CT, school staff, and WOWW coaches. The
authors reflect that the combination of weekly feedback from WOWW
coaches, and consolidation work from the CT were critical factors in the
success of the intervention. The CT reflected that the weekly feedback
sessions with coaches were fundamental to the results achieved, and enabled
the children to become more aware of their behaviour and consider how each
could individually improve. The CT commented that giving the children
 Educational Psychology in Practice 27

individual feedback allowed them to listen to each other’s feedback, and

highlighted and modelled the positive behaviour expected of them in the
classroom. The CT suggested this was something which would have been dif-
ficult to achieve in the classroom without the help and support of the EP and
assistant EP for research. The WOWW coaches reflected that the weekly
feedback was also an opportunity to model how to provide positive and spe-
cific feedback around the targeted behaviour to teaching staff. The WOWW
coaches also reflect that the consolidation work conducted by the CT in
between weekly visits kept the intervention fresh (for example, a poster to
display the names and actions of pupils who had worked particularly hard to
meet a target during the week) and added value to the project. The CT sug-
gested that the support of the head teacher contributed to her confidence in
implementing WOWW. The commitment of the classroom staff, head teacher
and WOWW coaches was a primary factor in the success of the project and
is an example of the solution-oriented principle of “No sign-up, no change”
(Rees, 2008, p. 171).
• Pupil ownership. Berg and Shilts (2005) stress the importance of children
owning solutions and signing up to change rather than complying with adult
led instructions and targets. Berg and Shilts (2004) suggest that when it is the
child’s choice s/he is more motivated and wants to perform better. The tar-
gets/goals set by pupils were consistent with the criteria set for good goals by
Berg and Shilts (2005) (that is, concrete, measurable, simple, realistic, achiev-
able, participative, collaborative and social). The successful pupil target/goal
setting and outcomes are a further example of the solution-oriented principle:
“No sign-up, no change” (Rees, 2008, p. 171). The daily involvement of
pupils in both target rating and sharing their observations of each other meet-
ing the class targets could be said to be a further example of the pupil owner-
ship of the targets set.
• Enjoyment of pupils. The authors perceived that the pupils enjoyed participat-
ing in the WOWW approach, and this was crucial to the success of the pro-
ject. To confirm this perception, three weeks post-intervention the WOWW
coaches asked the pupils to indicate (via thumbs up, thumbs across or thumbs
down to indicate “enjoyed all the time”, “enjoyed some of the time” and
“never enjoyed it”, respectively) how much they had enjoyed taking part in
the project. Eighty-four per cent of pupils indicated they had enjoyed the pro-
ject all of the time, with 16% indicating they enjoyed it some of the time.
• Collaboration in the classroom. In line with the Bruce et al. (2009) alteration
to the WOWW feedback procedure, the CT and pupil support assistant were
given positive feedback in relation to the targets in the classroom alongside
the pupil feedback. It could be said that this engendered an ethos of collabo-
ration and cooperation within the classroom, with everyone in the classroom
working towards the same goals. Rees (2008) states that “Co-operation
enhances change” and Berg and Shilts (2004), highlight that for both teacher
and student to succeed they must cooperate with each other and one cannot
succeed with the help of the other.
• Target setting. The authors reflect that the use of the TME form was particu-
larly helpful in identifying targets which were the focus of the initial class-
room observation and positive feedback (weeks one to three). This targeted
feedback was a deviation from the Berg and Shilts’ (2004, 2005) methodol-
28 E.L. Brown et al.

ogy which suggested that initial observation and feedback should be non-spe-
cific. However, this approach highlighted existing exceptions in pupil behav-
iour in relation to the CT’s targets, whilst providing a model of positive
behaviour expected of pupils in the classroom.

The authors reflect that other factors may have contributed to the positive improve-
ments observed in the classroom. These include the ongoing work of the behaviour
support teacher and/or the natural maturation of the pupils over the 10-week period.
However, the CT had tried a variety of approaches in the five months pre-interven-
tion, with minimal impact on whole class behaviour. Thus it appears that WOWW
offered a unique contribution to resolving issues around classroom behaviour and
relationships.

Limitations of current study

Whilst overall the project was perceived to have a positive impact on the behaviour
and the relationships within the class, the authors reflect there were some limitations
to this study which should be considered when using and evaluating the WOWW
approach in the future.
The authors acknowledge limitations of the data collected in that it was largely
qualitative, and based on self-report and perceptions rather than objective and stand-
ardised measures. Quantitative data were limited to that gathered through the rating
scales. Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2005) state that validity and reliability can
be addressed in qualitative research through triangulation of data and the objectivity
of the researcher. The WOWW coaches were in complete agreement across the 10
weeks of observations with regard to perceived improvements in behaviour and
relationships in the class, and these perceptions were triangulated with the percep-
tions of school staff and pupils. It should also be noted that the qualitative data tri-
angulated with the quantitative data. However the authors acknowledge that the
conclusions drawn may have been supported by the addition of structured observa-
tions pre- and post-intervention. In regard to data collected from pupils, the authors
acknowledge that alternative methodologies might have been used (for example,
focus groups, questionnaires); however it had been considered that non-verbal rat-
ings and full class discussions were most appropriate for the pupils’ age and stage
of development, and were familiar to the pupils.
Whilst the project was effective in changing perceptions of pupil behaviours and
relationships, it could be considered that one limitation of the project was the lack
of parental involvement. In their review of the SEAL (Social Emotional Aspects of
Learning) programmes Humphrey et al. (2008) suggest that programmes targeting
these areas could be more effective if parents are active participants. With regard to
the WOWW approach, parents could be involved in reinforcing positive goal related
behaviours outside of school. This was noted by the CT during the initial evaluation
meeting.
With regard to implementation of the WOWW approach with this age group
some difficulty was encountered with introducing the concept of scaling. Whilst the
WOWW coaches tried to make the scale more accessible to this young age group
by incorporating visual supports, the pupils initially found it challenging to grasp
the concept of scaling. The CT revisited scaling daily, in a number of ways, until
the pupils became proficient and were able to independently rate themselves
 Educational Psychology in Practice 29

realistically, explaining their ratings and how they could improve. The authors
reflect that the WOWW approach is flexible and can be adapted to suit pupils of all
ages and abilities [see also Kelly and Bluestone-Miller (2009) who describe evalua-
tion of the approach being used with Kindergarten through to eighth grade pupils].

Next steps
At the initial evaluation meeting some next steps were collaboratively agreed. In
particular the CT agreed to continue reviewing the targets on a daily basis, and set
new targets in collaboration with the class as they became confident in maintaining
their positive performance on the initial targets. The CT also intended to continue
with the WOWW poster in class, and to introduce a positive reward system for the
whole class specifically related to working hard.
At the longer term evaluation meeting, at the end of the academic year, it was
agreed that the ongoing reference to the targets had helped settle the class after the
Easter break, and although the pupils had now set new targets, they were maintain-
ing their positive performance on the initial targets. In the next academic year the
class will be split into new class groups, thus it will not be possible for a direct
continuation of the approach. However, the EP intends to liaise with both the origi-
nal CT, and the new CTs, to ensure that information about “What Worked” (that is,
target setting/scaling, verbal and visual positive reinforcement, pupil involvement)
is shared. The CT reflected that the time and effort she invested in the approach
were worthwhile, and have provided her with knowledge and understanding of the
WOWW principles, which she will use again.
It is also the intention of the EP and CT to disseminate the findings from the
project to all school staff, some of whom have expressed interest following observa-
tion of the positive impact of this project. The findings from this study are being
shared within the wider local authority, and nationally, with schools and EPSs,
through presentations at conferences, training events and written communication to
contribute to the evidence base for solution-focused approaches and WOWW in par-
ticular.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the WOWW approach had a positive impact upon the behaviour and
relationships of all pupils within the primary one/two class. All staff involved in the
approach found the experience enjoyable and useful, and the majority of pupils sta-
ted it was enjoyable for all the time. These findings strengthen the evidence base
for the use of solution-focused approaches within the classroom and the WOWW
approach in particular. The results suggest that collaborative working between class-
room staff and EPs can be an effective catalyst for change when subscribing to
solution-oriented principles such as: “If it works do more of it”; “A focus on future
possibilities and solutions enhances change”; “People have the necessary resources
to make change possible”; “No sign-up, no change” and “Co-operation enhances
change” (Rees, 2008, pp. 170–171). Although the project was time consuming, the
authors reflect that leading this project was an effective use of EPs time and
resources as it is a good example of early intervention, and may have a longer term
impact on the teaching and learning of that group of pupils, and on groups of pupils
working with the CT in the future.
30 E.L. Brown et al.

References
Ajmal, Y. (2001). Introducing solution-focused thinking. In Y. Ajmal & I. Rees (Eds.), Solu-
tions in schools (pp. 10–29). London: BT Press.
Berg, I.K., & Shilts, L. (2004). Classroom solutions: WOWW approach. Milwaukee, WI:
BFTC Press.
Berg, I.K., & Shilts, L. (2005). Classroom solutions: WOWW coaching. Milwaukee, WI:
BFTC Press.
Bruce, S., Mackintosh, K., & McDonald, J. (2009, September). WOWW. Working on What
Works. Workshop presented at the Annual Conference for EPs in Scotland, Edinburgh.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education. Oxford:
RoutledgeFalmer.
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 Ther-
apy in a school setting. Children and Schools, 30, 15–26.
Harker, M. (2001). How to build solutions at meetings. In Y. Ajmal & I. Rees (Eds.), Solu-
tions in schools (pp. 30–44). London: BT Press.
Humphrey, N., Kalambouka, A., Bolton, J., Lendrum, A., Wigelsworth, M., Lennie, C., &
Farrell, P. (2008). Primary Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL): evaluation
of small group work, DCSF research report 064. London: DCSF. Retrieved April 11,
2011, from http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/DCSF-RR064.pdf
Kelly, M.S., & Bluestone-Miller, R. (2009). Working on What Works (WOWW): coaching
teachers to do more of what’s 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.
Mall, M., & Stringer, B. (2001). Brief therapy approaches with groups and families in an
education support service. In Y. Ajmal & I. Rees (Eds.), Solutions in schools (pp. 60–
74). London: BT Press.
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: Jes-
sica Kingsley Publishers.
Sheldon, K.M., & King, L. (2001). Why positive psychology is necessary. American Psy-
chologist, 56, 216–217.
Shilts, L. (2008). The WOWW program. In P. De Jong & I.K. Berg (Eds.), Interviewing for
solutions (pp. 286–293). Belmont: Thomson Press.
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.
Stobie, I., Boyle, J., & Woolfson, L. (2005). Solution-focussed approaches in the practice of
UK educational psychologists. School Psychology International, 26, 5–28.
Strachan, G. (2001). From the impossible to the solution. In Y. Ajmal & I. Rees (Eds.),
Solutions in schools (pp. 45–59). London: BT Press.
Copyright of Educational Psychology in Practice is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.