The Effects of Tootling via ClassDojo on Student Behavior in Elementary Classrooms
Dillon, Melissa B. McHugh; Radley, Keith C.; Tingstrom, Daniel H.; Dart, Evan H.; Barry, Christopher T. (2019). School Psychology Review, v48 n1 p18-30. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1210718
-
examining74Students, grade5
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2024
- Practice Guide (findings for Tootling (with ClassDojo))
- 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.
-
Female: 53%
Male: 47% -
Rural
-
- 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 35% Two or more races 1% White 64% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in three fifth-grade classrooms in two rural schools in a Southeastern state. All classrooms were general education classrooms.
Study sample
The student sample is 52.7% female and 47.3% male. Two-thirds of the students identify as White (63.5%) and one-third identify as Black (35.1%). 12.2% of the students have an individualized education plan (IEP).
Intervention Group
At the beginning of each 20-minute intervention session, teachers instructed students to make mental notes of appropriate peer behavior observed throughout the time period and reminded them that they would have the opportunity to record these tootles using the computers (ClassDojo) at the end of that time period. At the end of each intervention session, students were asked to record their tootles on the ClassDojo program. Each student was afforded approximately five seconds to tootle. After students submitted their tootles, the total number of tootles, names of students who received a tootle, and the reason why were given were shared on an interactive whiteboard. The teacher then praised the students for their progress. If preestablished goals were achieved (target number of tootles), the teachers provided rewards (e.g., Skittles, extra time for recess). The intervention was implemented at least three times per week during 20-minute class sessions. Each intervention phase involved at least five sessions. The entire study period spanned 22 sessions for Classrooms B and C, while Classroom A continued for 25 sessions.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group for single-case designs. Teachers continued their typical classroom practices without any tootling during the baseline and withdrawal phases. Each baseline/withdrawal phase involved at least five sessions, each approximately 20 minutes long.
Support for implementation
Teachers received training sessions on the tootling process that lasted approximately 15 minutes. Training started with the primary researcher describing how tootling worked. Next, the researcher shared how to log into ClassDojo and provided live examples of how to use the program. The researchers provided a training script for teaching the tootling procedures to their students. The researcher invited the teachers to practice the script and ask any questions, and the researcher provided feedback prior to the intervention. Teachers trained students in the time between the baseline and the first intervention phase. Teachers were also able to ask questions of the researchers and receive implementation feedback during the intervention sessions.
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).