O'Keeffe, J. (2019). Queen's University Belfast Repository. https://pure.qub.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/a-feasibility-study-and-a-pilot-cluster-randomised-controlled-tri.
Reviewed: February 2023
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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Good Behavior Game.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Child Self-Control Rating Scale, based on student report |
Good Behavior Game vs. Business as usual |
2 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
4.02 |
3.69 |
No |
-- | |
|
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, based on student report |
Good Behavior Game vs. Business as usual |
2 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
1.79 |
1.69 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 0% | |
| Black | 1% | |
| Other or unknown | 2% | |
| White | 96% |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 96% | |
| Other or unknown | 4% |
| Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) | 67% | |
| No FRPL | 33% |
The study took place in 17 schools near Belfast, Northern Ireland. Two schools dropped out of the study before its conclusion, thereby leaving 15 schools in the study.
A total of 355 Primary 3 students ages 6 through 8 were included in the study. The 355 students were taught by 19 teachers in 15 schools. Approximately 48 percent of the students were male, 4 percent were English learners, and 30 percent had a special educational need. Additionally, 96 percent were White, 1 percent were Black, less than 1 percent were Asian, and 2 percent were multiple races or not specified. The researchers randomly assigned 9 schools to the intervention group and 8 schools to the comparison group and 2 schools, 1 in each group, left the study before its conclusion.
The PAX Good Behavior Game (PAX GBG) is a behavioral classroom management intervention that promotes students collaborating together to create a positive learning environment. Intervention teachers delivered PAX GBG in their classrooms by placing all their students into teams (typically 3 to 5 teams per classroom). At the end of each game, the teacher rewarded the teams that demonstrated appropriate behaviors during game play. Rewards included nonmaterial, age-specific prizes such as breaks, quiet time, and time for students to listen to music. The amount of time students spent playing each game ranged from 10 minutes to 40 minutes with the time increasing as students became more familiar with the game. Students played PAX GBG 3 times per day over a 12-week period in the classrooms participating in the study.
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual instruction and did not play PAX GBG until after the study concluded.
Teachers in the intervention group attended 2 days of PAX GBG trainings and received a teacher pack with the materials necessary to implement the intervention, including the game manual, scoreboard, prize booklet, and digital timer. During the 12-week implementation, the trainers visited intervention classrooms to provide support to intervention teachers and conduct class observations to ensure program delivery met the criteria specified by the developer and the PAX Partner Trainers.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube