Using the Good Behavior Game to Promote Positive Behaviour at School

1. Using the Good Behavior Game to Promote Positive Behaviour at School Jennifer L. Austin, Ph.D., BCBA-D University of South Wales

2. Some Context: Behaviour Problems in Schools • Fighting • Bullying • Verbal abuse toward teachers • Violence toward teachers • Property destruction • Noncompliance • Defiance • Late to class • Truancy • Trespassing • Vandalism • Tobacco use • Drug use • Alcohol use • Weapons violations • Insert your favourite here

3. Identifying the scope of the problem • Clearly, behaviour challenges at school can range from minor to severe. • However, a recent Offices of Standards of Education (Ofsted, 2014) report indicated the most common form of problematic behaviours were low-level, high-frequency disruptions. • “which wears staff down and interferes with learning” (p. 4)

4. The report further found • “newly trained teachers often report(ed) that their initial training contained very little specific guidance as to how to understand and manage pupils’ difficult behavior” (p.12). • These findings are consistent with previous research, which shows that teachers feel they lack adequate skills to deal with common problem behaviours (Latham, 2002; Merrett & Wheldall, 1993).

5. Where it begins...

6. Where it often ends...

7. When it comes to addressing problem behaviour at school, the stakes are high. • When students behave badly at school, it can affect • learning opportunities and outcomes for students with behaviour problems • learning opportunities and outcomes for other students • teacher satisfaction, stress, and retention

8. Common Response to Challenging Behaviour: Get Tough! • Tougher rules • Tougher consequences • Zero tolerance • …which perpetuates a culture of punishment.

9. However…. • If a child doesn’t know how to read, we teach. • If a child doesn’t know how to add, we teach. • If a child doesn’t know how to swim, we teach. • If a child doesn’t know how to behave, we ___. • Problem behaviour needs to be viewed as a skill deficit rather than solely a behavioural excess.

10. Teaching Appropriate Classroom Behaviour • The first step is figuring out what students need to be doing to help them be more successful at school. • It’s better to set fewer expectations that capture many behaviours. No Ms. Barnett liked to go over a few of her rules on the first day of school

12. Using the Good Behaviour Game to Teach Classroom Expectations • The Good Behaviour Game (GBG) is a strategy that provides all the essentials of good teaching: • Antecedents to evoke appropriate behaviour • Frequent opportunities to engage in appropriate behaviour • Frequent opportunities for reinforcement • Corrective feedback when necessary • And you get some added bonuses • Encourages children to work as a team • Gives teachers a transferable skill.

13. Good Behaviour Game Basics • Teacher sets 3-4 expectations for good behaviour. • Students are divided into teams. • Points are awarded during the game. • Teams must work together to win the game • Interdependent group contingency • If one member earns a point, the whole team earns a point. • The whole team either wins or loses. • Teams that meet the criterion at the end of the game win the game • The competition is against a criterion, not against each other.

14. Dividing Students into Teams • The original GBG (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969) and subsequent implementations divided the class into two teams. • However, smaller teams might be easier for the teacher to manage. • Whatever strategy you use, make sure there is an equal mix of behavioural difficulties on each team. • i.e., Don’t put all the most badly behaved kids on the same team!

15. Awarding Points • The original GBG (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969) and subsequent implementations awarded points each time a team member violated an expectation. • In this version, teams with less than a certain number of points win the game. • e.g., If your team has earned less than five points during the game, you win. • This version is probably the most straightforward and easy to use. • But it also places the teacher’s focus on what the students are doing wrong.

16. Awarding Points (Option 2) • The GBG also can be played whereby teams earn points for meeting expectations (Groves & Austin, in press; Wright & McCurdy, 2011). • This is a bit more complicated, but • it places the focus on reinforcing appropriate behaviour. • it potentially provides more opportunities for reinforcement during the game.

17. Playing the Reinforcement Version • Determine how long the GBG will be played and divide that time into equal intervals • For example, if the game is 20 min, then intervals might be 4 min (or less, depending on behaviour) • Determine how many points are necessary to win the game • If there is a total of 5 points available, then set the criterion below that (at least initially) • Use a timer or Motivaider to keep track of the intervals and award points to teams who have met the expectations during the intervals

18. Keeping Score Team points are typically visible to the students during the game. Score keeping can simply be tallies on a white board Or something more creative...

19. Keeping Score

20. Winning the Game • At the end of the game, the teacher determines which teams have won and provides a reward to the winning teams. • Usually the reward is relatively small and can be delivered quickly • Edible, sticker, a short game, or bit of free-time • Over time, winning the game (and other natural contingencies) often is enough to maintain appropriate behaviour.

21. Integrating the GBG into Classroom Routines • When starting the GBG, it is better to have multiple short games spaced throughout the day • This increases the chances of winning • And also avoids “demoralising” teams who didn’t win • Choose times when behaviour tends to be most problematic • but be careful not to start a game contingent on problem behaviour. • Game times can be lengthened as behaviour improves

22. What does the research say? • There are a wealth of studies showing the benefits of the GBG on improving classroom behaviour across a range of age groups • See Flower, McKenna, Bunuan, Muething, & Vega, R. (2014) and Tingstrom, Sterling-Turner, & Wilczynski (2006) for reviews.

23. What does the research say? • Research also shows that children who participate in the GBG in primary school are at reduced risks for a range of other problems later in life: • drug and alcohol dependencies, smoking, antisocial behavior (Kellam et al., 2008) • high-risk sexual behaviors (Kellam et al., 2014) • suicide attempts and suicidal ideation (Wilcox et al., 2008)

24. Some Current GBG Research Evaluating the necessity of teams • Some teachers are reluctant to divide students into teams because they feel their students won’t work well in groups. • They might have histories of not getting along with peers, have poor teamwork skills, etc. • We evaluated team and individual versions of the GBG in a primary PRU

25. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in press). An evaluation of interdependent and independent group contingencies during the Good Behavior Game. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

26. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in press). An evaluation of interdependent and independent group contingencies during the Good Behavior Game. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

27. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in press). An evaluation of interdependent and independent group contingencies during the Good Behavior Game. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis.

28. Some Current GBG Research Evaluating peer comments during the GBG • One concern teachers have about the GBG is that the interdependent group contingency will create negative peer pressure on those who don’t behave well • i.e., threatening, bullying • We are currently evaluating the effects of the GBG on classroom behaviour and peer comments • in a secondary PRU...

29. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary schools for children with behaviour disorders.

30. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary schools for children with behaviour disorders.

31. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary school for children with behaviour disorders.

32. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary school for children with behaviour disorders.

33. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary school for children with behaviour disorders.

34. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in preparation). Evaluating peer interactions during the Good Behaviour Game in a secondary school for children with behaviour disorders.

35. Some Current GBG Research Evaluating the GBG at home • Good classroom management shares common features with good core parenting skills • Set clear expectations • Reinforce meeting expectations • Reinforce often • The GBG also has the potential to help siblings engage more cooperatively with one another • We evaluated the GBG as a parenting strategy for two high-risk families who were attending an IY group

36. Austin, J. L. & Eldridge, J. L (in preparation). The Good Behaviour Game as a parenting strategy in high-risk families.

37. Austin, J. L. & Eldridge, J. L (in preparation). The Good Behaviour Game as a parenting strategy in high-risk families.

38. Austin, J. L. & Eldridge, J. L (in preparation). The Good Behaviour Game as a parenting strategy in high-risk homes.

39. Austin, J. L. & Eldridge, J. L (in preparation). The Good Behaviour Game as a parenting strategy in high-risk homes.

40. Want more information? Jennifer L. Austin, PhD, BCBA-D School of Psychology University of South Wales jenn.austin@southwales.ac.uk Twitter: @DrJennAustin

41. References Barrish, H. H., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. W. (1969). Good behavior game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 119-124. Flower, A., McKenna, J. W., Bunuan, R. L., Muething, C. S., & Vega, R. (2014). Effects of the Good Behavior Game on challenging behaviors in school settings. Review of Educational Research, 84, 546-571. Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (in press). An evaluation of interdependent and independent group contingencies during the Good Behavior Game. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. Tingstrom, D. H., Sterling-Turner, H. E., & Wilczynski, S. M. (2006). The Good Behavior Game: 1969-2002. Behavior Modification, 30, 225-253. Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Poduska, J., Ialongo, N., Wang, W., Toyinbo, P., … Wilcox, H. C. (2008). Effects of a universal classroom behavior management program in first and second grades on young adult behavioral, psychiatric, and social outcomes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95(Suppl 1), S5–S28. Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Mackenzie, A. C. L., Brown, C. H., Ompad, D. C., Or, F., … Windham, A. (2014). The impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based preventive intervention in first and second grades, on high-risk sexual behaviors and drug abuse and dependence disorders into young adulthood. Prevention Science : The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 15(0 1), 6–18. Wilcox, H. C., Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., Poduska, J., Ialongo, N. S., Wang, W., & Anthony, J. C. (2008). The impact of two universal randomized first- and second-grade classroom interventions on young adult suicide ideation and attempt. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95 (Suppl 1), S60–S73. Wright, R. A., & McCurdy, B. L. (2011). Class-wide positive behavior support and group contingencies: Examining a positive variation of the Good Behavior Game. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 173-180.