Wikipedia

Good Behavior Game

This article is about the classroom behavior strategy. For other uses, see PAX (disambiguation).

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom management strategy used to increase self-regulation, group regulation and stimulate prosocial behavior among students while reducing problematic behavior.[1] Major research at Johns Hopkins Center for Prevention and Early Intervention has studied three cohorts of thousands of student, some of whom have been followed from first grade into their 20s. In multiple scientific studies, the Good Behavior Game dramatically reduces problematic behavior within days and weeks.[2][3][4]

The first study of GBG was published in 1969,[5] using a 4th grade classroom. The study was the first application of applied behavior analysis to a whole classroom. In the original study, the classroom was divided into two teams. The students were to engage in the math or reading activities as teams. Paying attention, engaging in the lessons or activity, was the "good behavior". If students engaged in actions the interfered with the lesson (e.g., getting out their seat, interrupting), that was a penalty point against the team—much like playing a sport. Each team could make up a fixed number of mistakes, and still win the game. That is much like professional sports, except both teams could win. If a team won the game, they earned an activity reward normally not allowed, which was based on the Premack Principle. Since the original 1969 study, the Good Behavior Game has become an efficient system to aid in preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders.[6][7]

Overview

edit

The Good Behavior Game was first used in 1967 in Baldwin City, Kansas by Muriel Saunders, who was then a new teacher in a fourth-grade classroom. Muriel Saunders, Harriet Barrish (a graduate student at the University of Kansas), and the professor and co-founder of applied-behavior analysis, the late Montrose Wolfe, co-created the Good Behavior Game in 1969.[5][8] The Game works by positive peer pressure of 2-to-5 classroom teams, who work together reduce inattentive, disturbing, disruptive, and destructive behaviors that interfere with learning and success. When the teams succeed, all the "winners" earn brief intrinsic activity rewards based on Premack's principle.[9] While the teacher can define the behaviors to be reduced, the game can be just as effective when students define the behaviors to be reduced to make a better learning environment.[10] A scientific major proponent of the benefits of GBG, Dennis Embry argues that the game is more likely to be acceptable, adopted, and sustained by teachers and students, when students actively participate in setting up the "rules" of the game.[3] Students teams win the game by having very low rates of disturbing, disruptive, destructive, or inattentive behaviors. The teacher must respond to such problematic behaviors neutrally and unemotionally, and the person who committed the breach is not called out or given "consequences." Rather, the team has a point against it, not the individual.[11] Teams who have less than a criterion of low points, win—typically less than 4 per team.[3]

Summary of Literature

edit

Studies done by Harris and Sherman (1973) and Barrish, Saunders, and Wolf (1969) examined the effectiveness of the Good Behavior Game with one fifth-grade classroom and one sixth-grade classroom. Each teacher attended a 15-minute meeting prior to implementing the procedures in his or her classroom. During the meeting, the researchers defined disruptive behavior, explained the recording system, and reviewed the procedures of the Good Behavior Game. After baseline data was collected, the teachers divided the students into two teams, discussed the rules of the game, and outlined the contingencies. The reward was a 10-minute early dismissal at the end of the school day. Again, the researchers recorded talking and out-of-seat behavior during 30-minute observation sessions. Each session was divided into 30 one-minute intervals. If one or more of the children exhibited the disruptive behavior, the interval was scored as containing disruptive behavior. In addition to collecting data on disruptive behavior, the researchers evaluated the students' academic performance during two math periods in the fifth-grade classroom. In the sixth-grade classroom, several experimental manipulations (i.e., eliminating the consequences, changing the maximum number of marks needed to win, eliminating feedback, and keeping the class intact) were performed to identify which components of the game were the most effective in reducing disruptive behavior. The findings show that implementing the Good Behavior Game successfully reduced disruptive out-of-seat and talking behavior. Each of the following procedural components contributed to its effectiveness: permission to leave school early, the number of marks chosen as a criterion, and the division of students into teams. Furthermore, a reduction in problem behavior resulted in slightly higher accuracy rates on the independent math tasks.[12][13]

Since the original 1969 study of the Good Behavior Game, there have been multiple randomized control trials conducted by Johns Hopkins University Center for Prevention and Early Intervention.[14][15][16][17]

Studies have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention and have found numerous benefits including improvement in writing quantity and quality,[18] math ability,[19][20] student behavior,[1] reducing aggression,[1][21] and reducing disruptive behaviors.[22][23]

References

edit
  1. ^ a b c Bowman-Perrott, Lisa; Burke, Mack D.; Zaini, Samar; Zhang, Nan; Vannest, Kimberly (2016). "Promoting Positive Behavior Using the Good Behavior Game: A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research". Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 18 (3): 180–190. doi:10.1177/1098300715592355. ISSN 1098-3007. S2CID 147478875.
  2. ^ Tingstrom, Daniel H; Sterling-Turner, Heather E; Wilczynski, Susan M (2006). "The Good Behavior Game: 1969-2002". Behavior Modification. 30 (2): 225–53. doi:10.1177/0145445503261165. PMID 16464846. S2CID 38750633.
  3. ^ a b c Embry, Dennis D (2002). "The Good Behavior Game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine". Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. 5 (4): 273–97. doi:10.1023/A:1020977107086. PMID 12495270. S2CID 4504251.
  4. ^ Smith, Stephanie; Barajas, Kimberly; Ellis, Brandi; Moore, Christina; McCauley, Spencer; Reichow, Brian (2021). "A Meta-Analytic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of the Good Behavior Game". Behavior Modification. 45 (4): 641–666. doi:10.1177/0145445519878670. ISSN 0145-4455. PMID 31578077. S2CID 203653361.
  5. ^ a b Barrish, Harriet H; Saunders, Muriel; Wolf, Montrose M (1969). "Good behavior game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom1". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 2 (2): 119–24. doi:10.1901/jaba.1969.2-119. PMC 1311049. PMID 16795208.
  6. ^ Tingstrom, Daniel H.; Sterling-Turner, Heather E.; Wilczynski, Susan M. (2006). "The Good Behavior Game: 1969-2002". Behavior Modification. 30 (2): 225–253. doi:10.1177/0145445503261165. ISSN 0145-4455. PMID 16464846. S2CID 38750633.
  7. ^ Kellam, Sheppard G.; Mackenzie, Amelia C. L.; Brown, C. Hendricks; Poduska, Jeanne M.; Wang, Wei; Petras, Hanno; Wilcox, Holly C. (2011). "The Good Behavior Game and the Future of Prevention and Treatment". Addiction Science & Clinical Practice. 6 (1): 73–84. ISSN 1940-0632. PMC 3188824. PMID 22003425.
  8. ^ Barrish, Harriet (1982). "Citation Classic - Good Behavior Game - Effects Of Individual Contingencies For Group Consequences On Disruptive Behavior In A Classroom" (PDF). Citation Classics. 16: 16.
  9. ^ "Behaviour game produces positive classroom results". CBC News. [full citation needed]
  10. ^ Fishbein, Jill E.; Wasik, Barbara H. (1981). "Effect of the good behavior game on disruptive library behavior". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 14 (1): 89–93. doi:10.1901/jaba.1981.14-89. PMC 1308189. PMID 16795642.
  11. ^ http://www.slideshare.net/drdennisembry[full citation needed][unreliable medical source?]
  12. ^ Medland, M. B; Stachnik, T. J (1972). "Good-behavior game: A replication and systematic analysis". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 5 (1): 45–51. doi:10.1901/jaba.1972.5-45. PMC 1310724. PMID 16795318.
  13. ^ Harris, V. W; Sherman, J. A (1973). "Use and analysis of the "Good Behavior Game" to reduce disruptive classroom behavior". Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 6 (3): 405–17. doi:10.1901/jaba.1973.6-405. PMC 1310853. PMID 16795423.
  14. ^ Dolan, Lawrence J; Kellam, Sheppard G; Brown, C Hendricks; Werthamer-Larsson, Lisa; Rebok, George W; Mayer, Lawrence S; Laudolff, Jolene; Turkkan, Jaylan S; Ford, Carla; Wheeler, Leonard (1993). "The short-term impact of two classroom-based preventive interventions on aggressive and shy behaviors and poor achievement". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 14 (3): 317–45. doi:10.1016/0193-3973(93)90013-L.
  15. ^ Ialongo, Nicholas S; Werthamer, Lisa; Kellam, Sheppard G; Brown, C Hendricks; Wang, Songbai; Lin, Yuhua (1999). "Proximal Impact of Two First-Grade Preventive Interventions on the Early Risk Behaviors for Later Substance Abuse, Depression, and Antisocial Behavior". American Journal of Community Psychology. 27 (5): 599–641. doi:10.1023/A:1022137920532. PMID 10676542. S2CID 16760317.
  16. ^ Smith, Emilie Phillips; Osgood, D. Wayne; Oh, Yoonkyung; Caldwell, Linda C (2017). "Promoting Afterschool Quality and Positive Youth Development: Cluster Randomized Trial of the Pax Good Behavior Game". Prevention Science. 19 (2): 159–73. doi:10.1007/s11121-017-0820-2. PMC 6533071. PMID 28766191.
  17. ^ Jiang, Depeng; Santos, Rob; Josephson, Wendy; Mayer, Teresa; Boyd, Leanne (2018). "A Comparison of Variable- and Person-Oriented Approaches in Evaluating a Universal Preventive Intervention". Prevention Science. 19 (6): 738–747. doi:10.1007/s11121-018-0881-x. PMID 29500615. S2CID 3661510.
  18. ^ Fallon, Lindsay M.; Marcotte, Amanda M.; Hamsho, Narmene F.; Robinson-Link, Patrick; Ferron, John M. (2021). "The impact of the good behavior game on writing quantity and quality". School Psychology. 36 (4): 255–260. doi:10.1037/spq0000436. ISSN 2578-4226. PMID 34292045. S2CID 236173814.
  19. ^ Conradi, L. A., Ryan, J., Fudge, O., Jameson, J. M., Fischer, A. J., Farrell, M., ... & McDonnell, J. (2021). Effects of the Good Behavior Game on Students with Severe Disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 56(4), 454-465.
  20. ^ Flower, Andrea; McKenna, John; Muething, Colin S.; Bryant, Diane Pedrotty; Bryant, Brian R. (2014). "Effects of the Good Behavior Game on Classwide Off-Task Behavior in a High School Basic Algebra Resource Classroom". Behavior Modification. 38 (1): 45–68. doi:10.1177/0145445513507574. ISSN 0145-4455. PMID 24132991. S2CID 39446665.
  21. ^ Flower, Andrea; McKenna, John W.; Bunuan, Rommel L.; Muething, Colin S.; Vega, Ramon (2014). "Effects of the Good Behavior Game on Challenging Behaviors in School Settings". Review of Educational Research. 84 (4): 546–571. doi:10.3102/0034654314536781. ISSN 0034-6543. S2CID 145711803.
  22. ^ RODRÍGUEZ-HERNÁNDEZ, A. G., VALLEJO-CASARÍN, A. G., SALDAÑA-GUTIÉRREZ, A. Y., & RIVERA-BARRIENTOS, A. M. Good Behavior Game as a Strategy to Reduce Disruptive Behavior in Mexican Students. Contenido/Summary, 29.
  23. ^ Meredith Murphy, J.; Hawkins, Renee O.; Nabors, Laura (2020). "Combining Social Skills Instruction and the Good Behavior Game to Support Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders". Contemporary School Psychology. 24 (2): 228–238. doi:10.1007/s40688-019-00226-3. ISSN 2159-2020. S2CID 150624499.
edit

Further reading

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Good_Behavior_Game&oldid=1244346918"