Classwide Intervention to Manage Disruptive Behavior in the Kindergarten Classroom
McGoey, Kara E.; Schneider, Dana L.; Rezzetano, Kristin M.; Prodan, Tana; Tankersley, Melody (2010). Journal of Applied School Psychology, v26 n3 p247-261. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ892351
-
examining36Students, gradeK
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2023
- Single Study Review (findings for Good Behavior Game)
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please download findings data here.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Other or unknown: 100% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Ohio
-
Race Other or unknown 100% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in two kindergarten classrooms located in one public school in northeast Ohio.
Study sample
This review focuses on the reversal-withdrawal single case designs for two classrooms (Classrooms A and B). Participants included 36 students in two kindergarten classes taught by two teachers in one school. The single-case design for each class focused on four focal students chosen based on the teacher’s recommendation and one random peer from the class who varied by session. Teachers selected the eight focal children based on concerns about their disruptive behavior and high levels of hyperactivity, aggression, or attention problems. The study did not provide additional demographic information.
Intervention Group
The Good Behavior Game is a classroom management strategy that promotes students collaborating together to create a positive learning environment. Students are placed into teams and are rewarded for demonstrating appropriate behaviors and not violating classroom rules. Before implementing Good Behavior Game, teachers and researchers met to collaboratively design the intervention and determine goals for the classroom. They defined the severity, intensity, and duration of target behaviors and developed rules based on classroom goals, such as being respectful of others, listening, and watching the teacher. Each teacher then divided their students into teams. If one of the students on the team broke a rule, their team lost a sticker on the Good Behavior Game poster. When students behaved appropriately, they received praise from the teacher. After five students on a team received praise, the teacher returned one of the stickers to the poster. At the end of the day, the team with the most stickers received a reward, such as candy, gum, stickers, free time, extra recess, or pizza. They played Good Behavior Game during normal class activities for 2 to 6 weeks in each classroom.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group in single case designs. In the baseline and withdrawal phases of the single case design for each class, teachers used existing behavior management strategies and routines. Researchers discouraged teachers from using Good Behavior Game techniques.
Support for implementation
The manuscript does not describe how teachers were supported to deliver the Good Behavior Game intervention.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).