The Effects of Co-Teaching Zones of Regulation on Elementary Students’ Social, Emotional, and Academic Risk Behaviors

Abstract

Student misbehavior is a significant concern in the current classroom. Teachers nationwide have implemented several approaches to reduce student misbehavior, including School-wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and co-teaching. However, since misbehaver still disrupts learning, research is still needed to find a classroom intervention that will reduce misbehavior in a classroom to prevent students from under achieving, disruption of peers’ learning and teacher burnout. Zones of Regulation focuses on self-regulation, while addressing sensory processing, executive functioning, and emotional regulation. This experimental study tested the effects of co-taught Zones of Regulation on students’ Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS). Fifty-six early elementary students (48% female) were assigned randomly to either the experimental group, which received co-taught direct instruction with Zones of Regulation or the control group, which received standard instruction with a morning meeting. It was predicted that the experimental group would score higher on the SAEBRS than the control group. Although results showed no statistical difference on the SAEBRS scores between the two groups, more students in the experimental group moved from “at risk” to “not at risk”. This study suggests additional research needs to be conducted to determine if co-taught Zones of Regulation instruction is an effective intervention for reducing misbehavior.

A Research Review of the Zones of Regulation Program

“…Based on a systematic review of the relevant literature, only three articles met the inclusion criteria. Two of the articles, Ochocki et al (2020), andConklin andJairam (2021), used pre-and posttest scores as measures of impact with varying results. The third article, Romanowycz et al (2021), summarized results of theses publications showing mixed outcomes and measured risk of bias as moderate to high in five of six studies.…”

“…A potential limitation of this study was the lack of fidelity by the social workers with the implementation of the Zones program and the reduced number of lessons presented. Conklin and Jairam (2021). Conklin and Jairam (2021) examined the effects of co-teaching Zones of Regulation on social and emotional behavior and the impact on academics.…”

“…Conklin and Jairam (2021). Conklin and Jairam (2021) examined the effects of co-teaching Zones of Regulation on social and emotional behavior and the impact on academics. The purpose of the study was centered on two research For the experimental group the majority of the students were identified as being "at risk" in at least one category according to the SAEBRS screen.…”

“…A further 17 articles were excluded as they were unpublished dissertations. The remaining three articles for further review were Ochocki et al (2020), Romanowycz et al (2021), and Conklin and Jairam (2021).…”

“…The current lack of research does not allow for any empirical analysis of the Zones' efficacy for students with any diagnosis label, let alone a broad "coalition" of labels. This is particularly true given that in Conklin and Jairam (2021) students receiving special education services were excluded from the study, and Ochocki et al (2020), unfortunately, did not provide any specific participant demographics to allow for any informal between-group (e.g., autistic, ADHD, or OCD) comparison. This, in turn, makes it impossible to know for whom Zones of Regulation may be effective.…”