The Contingent Use of Teacher Attention and Praise in Reducing Classroom Behavior Problems

Becker, Wesley C.; Madsen, Charles H.; Arnold, Carole R.; Thomas, Don R.

doi:10.1177/002246696700100307

Cited by 291 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The concurrent validity of the PDR has been demonstrated in association with a number of measures of child and family functioning, including live observations of family interactions coded in the home (Forgatch & Toobert, 1979;Patterson, 1976) and parents' global ratings of child behavior (Becker, Madsen, Arnold, & Thomas, 1967). In addition, the PDR has been demonstrated to be a reliable indicator of treatment outcome success (Chamberlain, Moreland, & Reid, 1992;Chamberlain & Reid, 1991).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

Leve¹,

Fisher²,

DeGarmo³

2007

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Converging research indicates that foster children with maltreatment histories have more behavior problems and poorer peer relations than biologically reared, nonmaltreated youth. However, little is known about whether such deficits in peer relations work independently or as a result of increased behavior problems, and whether outcomes for foster children differ by sex. To address these questions, multiagent methods were used to assess peer relations at school entry among maltreated foster children and a comparison sample of low-income, nonmaltreated, biologically reared children (N = 121). Controlling for caregiver-reported behavior problems prior to school entry, results from a multigroup SEM analysis suggested that there were significant relationships between foster care status and poor peer relations at school entry and between foster care status and the level of behavior problems prior to school entry for girls only. These Sex × Foster care status interactions suggest the need for gender-sensitive interventions with maltreated foster children. Keywordsfoster care; maltreatment; peer relations; sex differences; school entry When children enter formal educational settings, they are expected to possess competencies that make it possible for them to respond to the demands of the school environment. Children who lack basic social skills and fail to develop successful peer relations during school entry are at greater risk for conduct problems, peer rejection, and academic failure throughout childhood and adolescence (Brendgen, Vitaro, Bukowski, Doyle, & Markiewicz, 2001;Dishion 1990;Snyder et al., 2005). Foster children are at particularly high risk for difficulties in this area. There are currently more than 500,000 foster care children in the United States, with more than 230,000 children entering foster care yearly (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2000). Beginning in early childhood, foster children show deficits on indicators of behavioral and mental health (Pilowsky, 1995). Early placement in foster careprior to age 5-appears to be particularly detrimental to later outcomes (Keiley, Howe, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 2001). Once foster children enter school, they show more behavior problems than nonmaltreated, biologically reared children and fare worse than their peers on indicators of school performance, including achievement, peer competence, high school completion rates, and special education service needs (Wodarski, Kurtz, Gaudin, & Howing, 1990). Though extensive behavioral and educational disparities among foster children have been well documented, few studies have examined whether behavior problems that emerge during the preschool period lead to subsequent poor outcomes or whether foster care elicits unique effects on peer relations over and above those associated with behavior problems.Correspondence regarding this paper should be addressed to Dr. Leslie D. Leve, Oregon Social Learning Center, 160 East 4 th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401-2426. E-mail: lesliel@oslc.org. Landsverk, Ganger, ...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

Leve¹,

Fisher²,

DeGarmo³

2007

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This The classes of child behaviors were developed by categorization of behaviors occurring with some frequency in the repertoire of problem children (Becker et al, 1967 The category of Noise Making was rated with the stipulation that the observers must hear the noise as well as see the noise-making action, and included tapping feet, clapping, rattling papers, tearing papers, throwing books or other objects onto desks, slamming desk top, tapping objects on desk, kicking desk or chair, and scooting desk or chair.…”

Section: Observation Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Contingent use of social reinforcement has been shown to control such motor behaviors as walking, standing, and running (Bijou and Baer, 1963), talking and crying (Kerr, Meyerson, and Michael, 1965;Hart, Allen, Buell, Harris, and Wolf, 1964), and classroom conduct (Becker, Madsen, Arnold, and Thomas, 1967;Zimmerman and Zimmerman, 1962). "The authors wish to thank Urbana School District #116 and the principal of Thomas Paine School, Mr. Richard Sturgeon, for their cooperation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

PRODUCTION AND ELIMINATION OF DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR BY SYSTEMATICALLY VARYING TEACHER'S BEHAVIOR¹

Thomas¹,

Becker²,

Armstrong³

1968

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

293

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of teacher behaviors on the classroom behaviors of children were investigated by systematically varying approving (praise, smiles, contacts, etc.) Becker et al. (1967) worked in public schools with teachers who had problem children in their classes. Behaviors exhibited by the students were observed and the frequency of these behaviors was estimated for each child. Each teacher was taught to use praise, smiles, etc. to reinforce good behavior. The rate of appropriate classroom behaviors increased in most cases as soon as teacher approval and recognition were made contingent on such behavior.The present study evolved from prior research showing the importance of social reinforcement, and Becker's work, which suggests that specific procedures, or definable classes of teacher behaviors can be used by the teacher to increase appropriate classroom behaviors. In order to provide more convincing data on the role of different teacher behaviors, the present study was designed to produce and remove problem behavior in students by systematically varying teacher behaviors in an initially well-behaved class. METHOD SubjectsStudents. A class of 28 elementary students at the middle-primary level was selected. According to the teacher her class was "a good class, with an above-average distribution of ability and no 'bad' kids." Most of the children were from upper-middle-and middle-35 1968, 1,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45] NUMBER I (SPRING, 1968)

show abstract

“…In many studies, teacher approval is operationalized as verbal praise (Hall, Panyan, Rabon, and Broden, 1968;McAllister, Stachowiak, Baer, and Conderman, 1969;Ward and Baker, 1968;Wasik, Senn, Welch, and Cooper, 1969). Yet, in other studies, verbal approval is supplemented with nonverbal attending behaviors on the part of the teacher such as smiling, patting, holding, touching, moving toward the child, making eye contact, varying tone of voice, among others (Becker, Madsen, Arnold, and Thomas, 1967;Buell, Stoddard, Harris, and Baer, 1968;Cooper, Thomson, and Baer, 1970 their individual effect on student behavior is rarely evaluated. Even when observational codes include nonverbal teacher behaviors such as facial expressions and physical contact (Becker et al, 1967) or proximity of the teacher to the pupil , it remains unclear whether these behaviors contribute to behavior change in the students independently of verbal approval alone.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

THE EFFECT OF NONVERBAL TEACHER APPROVAL ON STUDENT ATTENTIVE BEHAVIOR¹

Kazdin

Klock

1973

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of contingent nonverbal teacher approval on student attentive behavior was examined in a dassroom with 12 retarded children. After baseline data were gathered on contingent verbal and nonverbal teacher approval and student attentive behavior, the teacher was instructed to increase her use of contingent nonverbal approval (smiles and physical contact) and to maintain her baseline level of verbal approval. After a reversal phase, the nonverbal approval phase was reinstated. Nonverbal teacher behaviors increased during the experimental phases, whereas verbal teacher approval (alone or in conjunction with nonverbal behaviors) did not increase. Attentive behavior increased for 11 of 12 students during the phases in which contingent nonverbal teacher approval increased. Correlational data suggested that nonverbal teacher approval accounted for behavior change of the students to a greater extent than did changes in the amount of teacher approval per se or in the teacher's use of verbal approval.Teacher approval or attention has been used extensively to alter student behavior in the classroom. In many studies, teacher approval is operationalized as verbal praise (Hall, Panyan, Rabon, and Broden, 1968;McAllister, Stachowiak, Baer, and Conderman, 1969;Ward and Baker, 1968;Wasik, Senn, Welch, and Cooper, 1969). Yet, in other studies, verbal approval is supplemented with nonverbal attending behaviors on the part of the teacher such as smiling, patting, holding, touching, moving toward the child, making eye contact, varying tone of voice, among others (Becker, Madsen, Arnold, and Thomas, 1967;Buell, Stoddard, Harris, and Baer, 1968;Cooper, Thomson, and Baer, 1970 their individual effect on student behavior is rarely evaluated. Even when observational codes include nonverbal teacher behaviors such as facial expressions and physical contact (Becker et al., 1967) or proximity of the teacher to the pupil , it remains unclear whether these behaviors contribute to behavior change in the students independently of verbal approval alone. One reason that nonverbal attending behavior usually is not evaluated is that verbal approval, as opposed to facial expressions and physical contact, constitutes most (about 85 %) of teacher attending behavior (Madsen, Becker, and Thomas, 1968). Moreover, teacher training is more likely to emphasize and alter verbal behavior as opposed to nonverbal behaviors (facial expressions and physical contact) (Kazdin, in press). Nevertheless, nonverbal teacher behaviors alone may provide an important source of reinforcement in the classroom. Indeed, several texts and manuals on behavior modification in the classroom advocate the use of nonverbal approval behaviors either to supplement praise or to provide reinforcement in their own right (

show abstract

The Contingent Use of Teacher Attention and Praise in Reducing Classroom Behavior Problems

Cited by 291 publications

References 3 publications

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

PRODUCTION AND ELIMINATION OF DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR BY SYSTEMATICALLY VARYING TEACHER'S BEHAVIOR¹

THE EFFECT OF NONVERBAL TEACHER APPROVAL ON STUDENT ATTENTIVE BEHAVIOR¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Contingent Use of Teacher Attention and Praise in Reducing Classroom Behavior Problems

Cited by 291 publications

References 3 publications

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

Peer Relations at School Entry: Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Foster Care

PRODUCTION AND ELIMINATION OF DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR BY SYSTEMATICALLY VARYING TEACHER'S BEHAVIOR1

THE EFFECT OF NONVERBAL TEACHER APPROVAL ON STUDENT ATTENTIVE BEHAVIOR1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

PRODUCTION AND ELIMINATION OF DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR BY SYSTEMATICALLY VARYING TEACHER'S BEHAVIOR¹

THE EFFECT OF NONVERBAL TEACHER APPROVAL ON STUDENT ATTENTIVE BEHAVIOR¹