This teacher training project aims to evaluate the use of play within a cognitive-behavioral intervention in the school environment, through the involvement of students and teachers

The proposed model is based on the fundamental assumption that any intervention designed for schools must be able to actively involve the protagonists of the teaching-learning processes. Therefore, in order for the intervention to increase its effectiveness, it cannot be reduced to a mere transmission of information and knowledge, but must involve the teachers in a process that implies:

  1. Identification of system resources and difficulties.
  2. Co-construction of response and/or solution strategies to the problems that emerge.
  3. Accompaniment of teachers involved in training to experimentation in the classroom and with colleagues.
  4. Analysis of changes and transformations that have taken place and redefinition of new training courses.

The proposed model is based on the most important scientific evidence emerging from national and international research on training’s effectiveness. From what has emerged, entering the school system requires two important attitudes:

  1. Listening to the experience and competence of the teachers
  2. Their accompaniment in classroom experimentation.

From this perspective, the trainer is an expert not only in the contents of the training, but also on the process of change. The trainer accompanies the teachers in the adoption of new educational strategies, application of teaching methods, scientific observation of classroom events, as well as self-observation. This is the most important task of the trainer. In fact, their intervention is never solitary, but makes use of an experts’ team to deal with every stage of the training and accompaniment process.

The five stages

Our training model was designed to meet all these objectives. In fact, it is a training-accompanying process, which takes place in five stages.

ISensitizationInform and transmit the prerequisites for play therapy at schoolMeetings in small and large groups
IICollection of informationDefinition of the problem subject to interventionCollection of information on children and teachers; meetings in small and large groups
IIIIntervention-AccompanimentCollection of field observations, definition and application of intervention practicesAnalysis of the proposed cases; individual and/or small group meetings
IVBalanceCritical analysis of the interventions in relation to the starting objectivesMeetings in small and large groups
VFollow-upVerification of the performance over time of the interventions carried outMeetings in small and large groups

The training model applies to all intervention topics specifically requested by the school. Its implementation involves a number of meetings distributed over the school year. Furthermore, the methods of meeting and the times of intervention are defined  by the school coordinators of the project, based on the resources and availability of the school.



To offer a targeted training course, capable of providing teachers with tools to manage, both actively and functionally, groups of students and improve the relationship with them. In particular, CBPT SCHOOL activities have the purpose of:

  • Improve the relationship and communication with students.
  • Help students develop a wide range of skills.
  • Improve the adaptation of students in the classroom and in other school settings.
  • Improve peer relationships.
  • Preventing bullying, school violence and other related issues.
  • Address the needs of students at risk.
  • Remove emotional and behavioral obstacles to learning


The intervention protocol provides the administration of some self and hetero-evaluation tools, both in the version for students and in that for teachers.

In fact, the protocol for students provides:

MORENO’S SOCIOMETRIC TEST. Nomination test in which the child indicates the names of peers with whom he would like and would not like to share some scholastic and extracurricular experiences. The text demonstrates a framework of the social fabric of the class.

QDS- Scale of the evaluation of relations with peers (Marsh, 1988; Camodeca et al., 2010). Self-assessment test in which each student describes the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the relationship with peers.

MY TEACHER AND I (Murray et al., 2008). Self/hetero-evaluation scale in which the child evaluates both their feelings towards the teacher and the degree of support and support that the teacher conveys with their educational interventions.

Instead, the teacher training protocol provides:

STUDENT-TEACHER RELATIONSHIP SCALE (Pianta, 2001; vr. It., Molinari e Melotti, 2010). Self/ hetero-evaluation scale in which the teacher describes the relationship with the student.

TEACHER-CHILD RATING SCALE (Hightower et al., 1986; vr. It. Santinello e Vieno, 2003). Hetero-evaluation scale, in which the teacher assesses the scholastic and relational adaptation of the child with reference to adults and peers.

MESI- Scale about emotions (Moè et al., 2008). Self-assessment scale, in which the teacher describes the emotions experienced at school during the teaching hours.

TRAIT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Petrides, 2009; vr. It., Di Fabio, 2013). Self-assessment scale of emotional intelligence trait.

TROMSO SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE SCALE (Silvera et al., 2001). Social intelligence self-assessment scale.