Effects of Classwide Positive Peer “Tootling” to Reduce the Disruptive Classroom Behaviors of Elementary Students with and without Disabilities

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the use of a classwide positive peer reporting intervention known as “tootling” in conjunction with a group contingency procedure to reduce the number of disruptive behaviors in a third-grade inclusive classroom. Nineteen elementary students including four students with disabilities (i.e., specific learning disabilities and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) were taught how to report their classmates’ positive behaviors using the “tootling” intervention. Results indicated that the use of the “tootling” intervention in combination with a group contingency procedure decreased students’ disruptive classroom behaviors, establishing a functional relation. Limitations of the study, implications for using tootling as a classwide positive behavior support, and future research questions are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Anderson, C. M., & Kincaid, D. (2005). Applying behavior analysis to school violence and discipline problems: School wide positive behavior support. The Behavior Analyst, 28(1), 49–63.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barlow, D. H., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cashwell, T. H., Skinner, C. H., & Smith, E. S. (2001). Increasing second-grade students’ reports of peers prosocial behaviors via direct instruction, group reinforcement, and progress feedback: A replication and extension. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 161–175.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Colvin, G., Sugai, G., & Good, R. H. (1997). Using Active Supervision and precorrection to improve transition behaviors in an elementary school. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 344–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fairbanks, S., Sugai, G., Guadino, D., & Lathrop, M. (2007). Response to intervention: Examining classroom behavior support in second grade. Exceptional Children, 73, 288–310.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fox, L., Dunlap, G., & Cushing, L. (2002). Early intervention, positive behavior support, and transition to school. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gresham, F. M., & Gresham, G. N. (1982). Interdependent, dependent, and independent group contingencies for controlling disruptive behavior. The Journal of Special Education, 16, 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of a response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267–272.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hieneman, M., Dunlap, G., & Kincaid, D. (2005). Positive support strategies for students with behavioral disorder in general education setting. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 779–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kidron, Y., & Fleischman, S. (2006). Promoting adolescents’ prosocial behavior. Educational Leadership, 63(7), 90–91.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lewis, T., Colvin, G., & Sugai, G. (2000). The effects of pre-correction and active supervision on the recess behavior of elementary students. Education and Treatment of Children, 23, 109–121.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Martens, B. K. (1992). Contingency and choice: The implications of matching theory for classroom instruction. Journal of Behavioral Education, 2, 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Martens, B. K., Witt, J. C., Elliott, S. N., & Darveaux, D. (1985). Teacher judgments concerning the acceptability of school-based interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 191–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Melman, S., Little, S. G., & Akin-Little, K. A. (2007). Adolescent overscheduling: The relationship between levels of participation in scheduled activities and self-reported clinical symptomology. High School Journal, 90, 18–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Richardson, B. G., & Shupe, M. J. (2003). The importance of teacher self-awareness in working with students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(2), 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Seymour, F. W., & Stokes, T. F. (1976). Self-recording in training girls to increase work and evoke staff praise in an institution for offenders. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 41–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Skinner, C. H., Cashwell, T. H., & Skinner, A. L. (2000). Increasing tootling: The effects of a peer-monitored interdependent group contingencies program on students’ reports of peers’ prosocial behaviors. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 263–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Skinner, C. H., Neddenriep, C. E., Robinson, S. L., Ervin, R., & Jones, K. (2002). Altering educational environments through positive peer reporting: Prevention and remediation of social problems associated with behavior disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Slavin, R. E. (1991). Cooperative learning and group contingencies. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1, 105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sterling-Turner, H. E., Robinson, S. L., & Wilczynski, S. M. (2001). Functional assessment of distracting and disruptive behaviors in the school setting. School Psychology Review, 30, 211–226.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Stormont, M., Lewis, T. J., & Beckner, R. (2005). Positive behavior support systems: Applying key features in preschool settings. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(6), 42–49.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide positive behavior support. School Psychology Review, 35, 245–259.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Van Houten, R. (1984). Setting up performance feedback systems in the classroom. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, J. Trap-Porter, & D. S. Hill (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 112–125). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  28. VonBrock, M. B., & Elliott, S. N. (1987). Influences of treatment effectiveness information on the acceptability of classroom interventions. Journal of School Psychology, 25, 131–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David F. Cihak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cihak, D.F., Kirk, E.R. & Boon, R.T. Effects of Classwide Positive Peer “Tootling” to Reduce the Disruptive Classroom Behaviors of Elementary Students with and without Disabilities. J Behav Educ 18, 267 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9091-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Positive peer reports
  • Classwide positive behavior supports
  • Inclusion
  • Classroom management
  • Group contingency