Reinforcement and Recognition

1. Reinforcement and Recognition Supported Evidence or Evasive Effervesce? Kathy Mott Tara Sladek-Maharg Cindi Spaulding Karen Zopatti

2. “The effectiveness of classroom management has a direct impact on student behavior. Student behavior can impact the quality of student achievement. The more effective classroom management strategies are, more effective teaching can take place and therefore better student learning can occur.” - Joe S. Valdivia (Marygrove College)

3. Definition Positive reinforcement is: • the offering of desirable effects or consequences for a behavior with the intention of increasing the chance of that behavior being repeated in the future • verbal praise, token economies, a smile or “high five”

4. Relevant Studies

5. Montarello & Martens (2005) Sample size: 4 Fifth Grade Students Purpose: effectiveness of a token economy on the completion of math papers Findings: treatment ratings m=3.75 baseline condition m=3.5 Validity threats: small sample size (4)

6. Lassen, et al (2006) Sample size: 3 year longitudinal study of an urban middle school Purpose: How positive reinforcement reduces problem behaviors and increases academic functioning Behavioral Findings: Cronbach’s alpha = .77 ANOVA suspensions per student (baseline to year 3) F=1.98, p‹.01 ANOVA long-term suspensions per student F=1.19, p‹.01 Academic Performance Findings: Kansas State Assessments (7th Grade – Reading 8th Grade – Math)

7. Bohanon, et al (2006) Sample size: 1,800 high school students Purpose: Assess the application of school-wide PBS in an urban high school setting Findings: High levels of reliability ( .96) Test-retest reliability (97.3% ave. agreement on items) Interobserver agreement 99% Construct validity (Pearson r =.75, p .01) Sensitivity to change (t = 7.63, df = 12, p  .001) “Initial data suggest[s] that school-wide implementation of PBS in high school settings may be very beneficial to students and school personnel in terms of reduction in ODRs (and hence increased instructional time)”- Bohanon, et al (2006)

8. Walker, et al (2005) Sample size: 72 students, 3 elementary schools Purpose: Examine the functioning of students within established PBS systems Findings: Reported reliability for the SSRS ranges from .78 to .94 Test-retest reliability (.84 to .93) One way ANOVA Significant and non-significant interactions Threats: Small sample size Variance among school demographics

9. Begent & Martens (2006) Sample size: Master’s level primary, secondary, and special needs teachers in training Purpose: Addressing prompting, reinforcement, and record keeping Findings: Teachers in training receive little training in behavioral practices, assessment strategies or instructional programs

10. Logical Plan to Prove Efficacy

11. Negative Behavior: 1) Becoming an increasingly problematic issue in elementary schools (Kilpatrick, 1992; Bennett, 1999; Lickona, 1992). 2) Effects student achievement (Kilpatrick, 1992; Bennett, 1999; Lickona, 1992, Valdivia, n.d.) 3) New teachers are often ill-equipped (Lassen et al, 2006). The Topic

12. The Research Problem/Justification of the Problem Teacher-education programs must effectively prepare teachers to deal with behavioral concerns to ensure on-task behavior and optimal academic achievement.

13. Deficiencies in Evidence 1) The literature includes extensive information related to the efficacy of in-service teaching training programs using positive reinforcement… (Lassen et al, 2006; Montarello & Martens, 2005; Begeny & Martens, 2006; Heilbrun & Waters,1968; Reid, 1996; Papanastasiou, 2002) 2) However, there is little discussion about pre-service training for teachers involving research-based interventions grounded in positive reinforcement strategies (Begany & Martins, 2006).

14. The Audience Teacher-Training Program Directors should be aware of the behavioral and academic benefits to students of teachers participating in pre-service, positive reinforcement behavior management strategy training.

15. Research Design Independent Variable: A pre-service teacher-training program emphasizing various research based interventions based on positive reinforcement. Dependent Variable: Decreased negative behavior (office referrals, suspensions, expulsions).

16. Target Population and Sampling Technique 1) Pre-service teachers, with student-teaching placements in schools with similar demographics relating to: 1) socioeconomic status 2) academic achievement 3) level of negative behavior (office referrals, suspensions, expulsions). 2) Nonrandomized sampling will be used to ensure school demographics and data are mostly homogenous and match the desired criteria.

17. Experimental Design A quantitative experimental between-group design will be used to assess the effect of the pre-service teacher-training program by comparing the experimental group to the control group.

18. Threats and Controls Internal Threats to Validity: 1) history 2) maturation 3) compensatory equalization 4) implementation 5) lack of random sampling 6) resentful demoralization

19. External Threats to Validity: 1) lack of explicit description of the experimental treatment 2) novelty and disruption effects

20. Quantitative Method Used to Analyze Hypothesis Testing Ho: There is no difference in frequency of negative behavior between the control group and the experimental group.

21. Expected Results The experimental group receiving the intervention will decrease frequency of negative behavior.

22. Implications for Further Research It may be of interest to conduct further research involving a second dependent variable, increased academic achievement. Ho: There is no difference in academic achievement between the control group and the experimental group.

23. References Begent, J.C., & Martens, B.K. (2006). Assessing pre-service teacher’s training in empirically-validated behavioral instruction practices. School Psychology Quarterly, 21, 262-285. Bennett, W. J., Finn, C. E., & Cribb, J. T. E. (1999). The educated child: a parent's guideﾊfrom preschool through eighth grade. New York: Free Press. Bohanon, H., Fenning P., Carney, K.L., Minnis-Kim, M.J., Anderson-Harriss. S., & Moroz, K.B., et al. (2006) Schoolwide application of positive behavior support in an urban high school: A case study. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8 (3), 131-145. Kilpatrick (1992). Why Johnny can't tell right from wrong. New York: Simon &ﾊﾊﾊﾊSchuster. Lassen, S.R., et al. (2006). The relationship of school-wide positive behavior support to academic achievement in an urban middle school. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 701-712. Lickona (1992). Educating for character: how our schools can teach respect andﾊﾊﾊﾊresponsibility. New York, N.Y: Bantam. Montarello, S. & Martens, B.K. (2005). Effects of interspersed brief problems on students’ endurance at completing math work. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14. 249-266. positive reinforcement. (n.d.). Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Retrieved July 11, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/positive reinforcement Sailor, W. et al. (2006). Anchoring school wide positive behavior support in structural school reform. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities. 31, 18-30 Walker, B., Cheney, D., Stage, S. & Blum, C. (2005). Schoolwide screening and positive behavior supports: Identifying and supporting students at risk for school failure. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 7 (4), 194-204.