Effects of Tootling on Classwide and Individual Disruptive and Academically Engaged Behavior of Lower-Elementary Students
McHugh, Melissa B., Tingstrom, Daniel H., Radley, Keith C., Barry, Christopher T., Walker, Kelly M. (2016). Behavioral Interventions, 31(4) 332-354.
-
examining64Students, grades2-3
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2024
- Practice Guide (findings for Tootling)
- 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.
-
5% English language learners -
Female: 52%
Male: 48% -
- 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
South
-
Race Black 75% Other or unknown 6% White 19% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 6% Not Hispanic or Latino 94% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study takes place in two grade 3 and one grade 2 classrooms in two public elementary schools located in a Southeastern state in the United States. Classrooms A and B are in the same elementary school; classroom C is located in a different elementary school.
Study sample
About 75% of the students were Black, 19% were White, and 6% were Hispanic. The sample included 48% male students and 52% female students. Approximately, 5% of students were English learners, and 6% received special education services.
Intervention Group
In the Tootling intervention, students are first trained on how to “tootle” or appropriately report positive peer behaviors. Students are provided with index cards and asked to write down positive behaviors of other students in the classroom. The teacher provides examples of positive behaviors that can earn points. Students are not permitted to tootle about themselves. Students submit their tootles into a centrally located box in the classroom. There was one tootling period each day during intervention phases, which usually lasted 20 to 30 min for Classrooms A and B. The teacher in Classroom C opted to utilize Tootling throughout the one-hour language arts class. Each classroom had a set goal (ranging from 25-30) for the number of tootles to be submitted in order to earn a small reward predetermined by the teacher and classroom students. At the end of the tootling period each day, the teacher updated the number of tootles on the progress thermometer. The teacher also read aloud five random tootles from the box and praised students for their positive behavior. If students met or exceeded the daily goal of tootles they received the reward.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group in single-case designs. During the baseline condition, teachers were instructed to adhere to their typical classroom routines. The number of baseline/withdrawal sessions ranged from 7 to 15.
Support for implementation
Each of the participating teachers were provided with one training session on the Tootling intervention procedures. This training session was provided by the primary investigator. During the training, teachers were taught to implement the components of the Tootling intervention and were provided with a script. The script included information on how teachers were to train students on Tootling. Teachers were also given the opportunity to practice the script with the researcher, ask questions, and receive feedback before implementing the intervention in their classrooms. Teachers were provided with opportunities to ask questions and receive feedback during the 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).