Yesterday we visited a rural elementary school and observed teachers delivering the PATHS programme (Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies). PATHS was designed by a team at Penn State University to help children behave more prosocially and learn to deal with situations of conflict by recognising their own emotions and the emotions of those around them.

We observed two lessons in the classroom and we took our own lesson away with us: if PATHS and other programmes are to be delivered with fidelity then high quality support for the staff involved in delivery is vital.

We were familiar with the programme already. We had read about it and listened to the developer of PATHS, Mark Greenberg, talk about it. We knew some of the things to look out for, and we noticed when they happened and when they didn’t.

Both lessons were fast-paced and fun. The children enjoyed them, and they seemed to get the messages: how to deal with feeling left out of games, and what it means to feel happy.

But we were surprised on our visit not to see the traffic light posters that encourage children to stop and think before acting; schools are encouraged to display these prominently everywhere, including the headteacher’s office.

We were taken aback, too, that the two teachers we spoke with only delivered one 15-minute session a week owing to other curriculum pressures; the recommended weekly dose is about 60 minutes delivered in, say, three 20-minute slots.

And we were slightly alarmed when a teacher referred to negative feelings on a chart as ‘bad’ feelings; pupils should be taught that ‘it is OK’ to feel sad, mad, upset and so on.

For 10 years teachers at the school had received intensive support from a coach (our chaperone as it happened) in implementing PATHS. This had come to an end two years previously with, it would seem, predictable results: the programme had started to drift.

Researchers from