Classrooms are complex environments, and students can choose to engage in a variety of behaviors, including desired academic and social behaviors, and undesired disruptive and passive (e.g., staring out the window) behaviors. Contingencies applied to student behavior in classroom environments have been shown to impact students' allocation of time to these competing behaviors (e.g., Heering & Wilder, 2006). These contingencies include individual and group-oriented contingencies. In this chapter, contingency components are described, strengths and weakness of different types of contingencies are analyzed, and recommendations for classroom applications of group-oriented contingencies are provided. CONTINGENCY COMPONENTSContingencies describe an if-then environment-behavior relationship. If, under certain environmental conditions (antecedent conditions or stimuli), the student exhibits a behavior (target behavior) to criterion (goal), then the environment (e.g., a teacher, peer, computer) will respond with another

A qualitative analysis of written reflective assignments during a service-learning project at a Southeastern university provide insight into students' learning, as well as a means of assessing the experience for student growth and change. Expectations and concerns of students prior to the project were compared with postexperience reflections to identify changes as a result of their participation. Among student concerns were building relationships and rapport, confidence, and skills; expectations included practical experience, translation of theory to practice, skill development, and career confirmation. Six postexperience themes resulted from analysis: client change, student feelings, student learning, activities/structure, relationship issues, and metaphors. A comparison of pre- and postanalyses support the value of service-learning for career confirmation, the development of professionalism, personal growth, and self-reflection.

No abstract

were determined by assessing the performance of 98 elementary students at risk for or identified with reading problems. Results yielded significant positive relationships between TOSWRF and CTBS Spelling (p < .01) and between TOSWRF and CTBS Reading and Language Composite scores (p < .05), when corrected for restriction in range. Relationships between TOSWRF and WJ-III subtests were also significant, whether corrected or uncorrected (e.g., Letter-Word Identification, Reading Fluency, Passage Comprehension, Spelling, and Broad Reading Cluster, p < .01). The TOSWRF has encouraging psychometric properties with potential for use in busy classrooms because of its efficiency (i.e., 3-minute administration), and versatility (i.e., individual or group administration options).The main purpose of reading is to gain comprehension, however, reading comprehension is complex and difficult to assess with reliability and validity. Reading fluency is critical to comprehension and can be assessed more efficiently. Presumably, fluent readers are able to read more information in a shorter period than less fluent readers, thereby enhancing comprehension.

No abstract