The principal game: A group consequence procedure to increase classroom in-task behavior

Abstract

The effect of principal attention contingent upon team on-task performance was examined in an unruly fourth-grade class. In the first condition, principal attention was delivered through a game-like group consequence procedure referred to as the Princi a1 Game. During the second experimental condition, principal attention was aelivered to individual subjects contingent upon each individual's behavior. Principal attention was found to be a strong reinforcer in both experimental conditions, but ercentage of on-task behavior during team consequences was higher than %wing individual consequences. University of Wisconsin-OshkoshOver the last few years there has been a proliferation of behavioral techniques within the public schools. The behavior agent (Johnson & Bailey, 1974;Seymour & Stokes, 1976), populations studied (Kazdin & Bootzin, 1972), and the techniques used (O'Leary & Drabman, 1971) have varied greatly. Two areas recently investigated have shown promise for managing the behavior of students in public school settings : group consequence procedures, and principal involvement in the reinforcement process. Illustrative of the first area is an investigation by Barrish, Saunders, and Wolf (1969), in which they introduced a technique referred to as the "Good Behavior Game." This technique combined the use of rules, team points, and back-up reinforcers to effectively decrease disruptive behavior in the classroom. Replications of the Barrish, et. al, study have been equally successful in modifying undesirable behaviors. For example, Harris and Sherman (1973) used the "Good Behavior Game" procedure in two fifth-and sixth-grade classrooms. These authors were successful in reducing disruptive out-of-seat behavior and talk-outs. The back-up reinforcer used by Harris and Sherman (1973) was permission for members of the winning team to leave for home 10 minutes early a t the end of the day. Simply, peer influence effected through team competition procedures is effective in eliminating much disruptive behavior of elementary age students.The second area of investigation which has shown promise is the practice of using the school principal as the behavior modifier. Brown, Copeland, and Hall (1972) have shown that when a principal delivered tokens plus back-up reinforcers contingent upon arriving in class on time, the chronic tardiness of their subject was eliminated. I n the same experiment, the author used playing basketball with the principal as the reinforcer to increase on-task behavior of a third-grade boy. Another study by Copeland, Brown, and Hall (1974) extended the effects of contingent principal attention to full classrooms. They found that use of contingent principal attention was effective in increasing academic performance in two thirdgrade classrooms.Contingent teacher attention has been used as a reinforcer in several experiments (

The Effects of the Good Behavior Game With General-Education High School Students

“…In contrast to the amount of literature base for the GBG of other age groups, investigations of the GBG utilizing elementary school aged participants (grades K-6) encompass the largest group of studies. Within this body of literature on the GBG, authors have found the GBG to be an effective procedure for not only decreasing disruptive behavior in this age group, but also for increasing appropriate behavior, increasing work completion and accuracy, increasing appropriate social behaviors and volleyball skills, and increasing oral hygiene (Bostow & Geiger, 1976;Darch & Thorpe, 1977;Darveaux, 1984;Fishbein & Wasik, 1981;Maloney & Hopkins, 1973;McCurdy, Lannie, & Bardabas, 2009;Medland & Stachnik, 1972;Mudgal, 2004Mudgal, , 2006Patrick et al , 1998;Robertshaw & Hiebert, 1973;Saigh & Umar, 1983;Swain et al , 1982). Robertshaw and Hiebert (1973) used a modified version of the GBG that they called the Good Astronaut Game with a first grade classroom.…”

Using Self‐management Interventions to Address General Education Behavioral Needs: Assessment of Effectiveness and Feasibility

“…Perhaps the most common intervention approach has involved the use of group contingencies, with the earliest and most well-known example being the Good Behavior Game (GBG; Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969). Numerous studies conducted over the past several decades have demonstrated the effectiveness of the GBG in decreasing off-task behavior and thereby promoting classwide performance (e.g., Darch & Thorpe, 1977;Fishbein & Wasik, 1981). Other research has documented the link between increased opportunities to respond (OTR) and increased engagement at the classroom level (Haydon, Mancil, & Van Loan, 2009).…”

Effect of the Good Behavior Game on Disruptive Library Behavior

“…DESCRIPTORS: classroom behavior, classroom management, disruptive behavior, on-task behavior, generalization The good behavior game, a group-oriented reinforcement contingency, has frequently been used to reduce disruptive behavior in classrooms. The good behavior game involves dividing the class into teams, stating criteria for behavior, observing teams for total compliance with criteria, and reinforcing those teams totally in compliance (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969;Darch & Thorpe, 1977;Medland & Stachnik, 1972). These studies have several characteristics in common: they took place in the regular classroom setting, used the game on a daily basis, and used rules designed without the input of the children.…”