The Quiet Classroom Game: A Class-Wide Intervention to Increase Academic Engagement and Reduce Disruptive Behavior
Radley, Keith C.; Dart, Evan H.; O'Handley, Roderick D. (2016). School Psychology Review, v45 n1 p93-108. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1141303
-
examining56Students, grade1
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2024
- Practice Guide (findings for Quiet Classroom Game)
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a SCD design where the independent variable is manipulated by the researcher, each outcome is measured systematically over time by multiple assessors with a sufficient number of assessment points and inter-assessor agreement, but there are an insufficient number of phases and/or assessments per phase to meet 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: 54%
Male: 46% -
- 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 96% Other or unknown 4% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 4% Not Hispanic or Latino 96% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study takes place in three first-grade classrooms in two public elementary schools in the Southeastern United States. Teacher A was located in in one school, while Teachers B and C were located in another school in the same district.
Study sample
The sample of students is 96% African American and 4% Hispanic. Fifty-four percent of the students were female.
Intervention Group
The study evaluated the effectiveness of the Quiet Classroom Game, a behavior intervention designed to increase academic engagement and reduce disruptive behavior of elementary students by arranging an interdependent group contingency based on the noise level in the classroom. Each teacher identified a 15-minute period to implement the intervention. The study included two intervention phases, with a total of 11-to-12 intervention sessions (depending on the classroom) as evaluated by the reversal/withdrawal design. The first intervention phase lasted 5-7 sessions, as evaluated by the multiple baseline design.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group for single-case designs. The baseline and withdrawal phases included business-as-usual classroom instruction during the sample 15-minute period that the intervention was implemented. The study included 6-to-10 baseline/withdrawal phases (depending on the classroom).
Support for implementation
Teachers were provided a 15-minute training by the researchers. Teachers were provided with a student-training script to read to their class. Teachers also received multiple materials to implement the intervention, including a MotivAider device and an iPad with the Decibel 10th App.
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).