[HOME] [teacher vistas] [online training] [FAQs] [forums] [resources] [links] [contact us] 01-01-2001 FEATURE ARTICLE The Good Student Game: Behavior Management for Diverse Classrooms ALLISON E. BABYAK, GAYLE J. LUZE, AND DEBRA M. KAMPS Copyright 2000 by PRO-ED, Inc. The Good Student Game is an effective classroom management tool appropriate for meeting the diverse needs of today's classroom teachers. Based on empirically validated procedures, such as the Good Behavior Game and self-monitoring strategies, the Good Student Game is an easy-to-implement intervention designed to help elementary students stay on task. This article provides a description of the game, recommendations for playing the game, and results from three classrooms demonstrating the effectiveness of the game. Suggestions stress the importance of teaching students to identify and evaluate good student behaviors, as well as the need for teachers to provide students with supportive feedback. Mrs. Stewart's fifth-grade general education class is diverse. Like many other teachers, Mrs. Stewart teaches students with attention problems, learning and/or behavioral difficulties, limited English proficiency, and giftedness. Mrs. Stewart is frustrated. She says that her students just "don't do what they're supposed to do." According to Mrs. Stewart, her students have trouble following directions and completing assignments; discipline is a constant struggle. Mrs. Stewart was looking for an easy-to-implement intervention that would help her students stay on task. When she was introduced to the Good Student Game, Mrs. Stewart was eager to try it. What follows is a description of the Good Student Game, recommendations for playing the game, and results from three classrooms demonstrating the effectiveness of the game. BACKGROUND The Good Student Game (Landrum & Tankersley, 1997) is a classroom management tool that uses a game format to help students monitor appropriate classroom behaviors such as staying seated and working quietly. The Good Student Game evolved from components of (a) the Good Behavior Game (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969) and (b) self-monitoring strategies. The Good Behavior Game has been effective in reducing inappropriate behaviors during both teacher-directed instruction and independent work activities (Darveaux, 1984; Fishbein & Wasik, 1981; Harris & Sherman, 1973; Medland & Stachnik, 1972). In a review of the research on the Good Behavior Game, Tankersley (1995) described the following procedures as essential to the game: Teachers define target behaviors they would like to see improved and determine when target behaviors are most problematic. Criterion is set for winning the game and reinforcers are established. Students are taught how to play the game. The classroom is divided into teams and team names are written on the chalkboard. When a student breaks a rule, the teacher puts a mark under the name of the student's team. At the end of the game, any team with fewer marks than the preestablished criterion wins, and winning teams receive reinforcers. The Good Student Game differs from the Good Behavior Game in several ways (see Table 1). First, teachers using the Good Behavior Game assume responsibility for monitoring student behaviors, whereas the Good Student Game allows students to self-monitor. Teachers who already feel overburdened by classroom pressures may prefer student self-monitoring to teacher monitoring. Second, because of its emphasis on self-monitoring, the Good Student Game provides opportunities for students to assess their own behavior. Students who self-monitor observe, evaluate, and record their own behaviors. Self-monitoring has been shown to be an effective strategy for increasing attention to task, positive classroom behaviors, and some social skills in general and special education settings (Hoff & DuPaul, 1998; Webber, Scheuermann, McCall, & Coleman, 1993). Click here to view the rest of the article Archived Feature Articles 01-NOV-02 20 Ways To.... Work Effectively with Paraeducators in Inclusive Settings Cathryn G. Riggs 01-APR-02 Three Steps for Gaining Access to the General Education Curriculum for Learners with Disabilities Margaret E. King-Sears 01-DEC-01 Accessing the Curriculum Creating Instructional Rubrics for Inclusive Classrooms Catharine R. Whittaker ? Spencer J. Salend ? Devon Duhaney 01-OCT-01 Responding to Student Concerns about Fairness Ann B. Welch November/December 2000, Teaching Exceptional Children, 33, (2) 36-40. 01-SEP-01 What?s Good? Suggested Resources for Beginning Special Education Teachers By: Sharon A. Maroney 01-JUN-01 Bright Futures for Exceptional Learners: An Action Agenda to Achieve Quality Conditions for Teaching and Learning Reprinted with Permission from CEC Today Online by the Commission on the Conditions for Special Education Teaching and Learning 01-MAR-01 Vocabulary Development: A Collaborative Effort for Teaching Content Vocabulary SUSAN S. JOHNSTON, BETH L. TULBERT, JOAN P. SEBASTIAN, 01-FEB-01 Tips for Communicating Academic Progress DR. JANE B. PEMBERTON, Assistant Professor of Special Education 01-JAN-01 The Good Student Game: Behavior Management for Diverse Classrooms ALLISON E. BABYAK, GAYLE J. LUZE, AND DEBRA M. KAMPS 01-DEC-00 Cooperative Learning and Social Skills: What Skills to Teach and How to Teach Them By: Marilyn W. Goodwin 01-NOV-00 Strategies and Resources to Evaluate the Impact of Inclusion Programs on Students By: Spencer J. Salend, Associate Professor of Special Education 01-OCT-00 Planning High Quality Assignments in Diverse Classrooms By: Joyce A. Rademacher, Associate Professor of Special Education 01-SEP-00 Boldly Going Where Angels Fear to Tread By: KAREN D. HOWELLS 01-AUG-00 Myths and Misunderstandings about Professional Collaboration By Marilyn Friend  Back to this month's feature article
		Copyright © 2001