Journal of Behavioral Education

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 222–238 | Cite as

Effects of Numbered Heads Together on the Daily Quiz Scores and On-Task Behavior of Students with Disabilities

Original Paper


Previous research has demonstrated that Numbered Heads Together, a cooperative learning strategy, is more effective than traditional teacher-led instruction in academic areas such as social studies and science. The current study compared the effects of two types of Numbered Heads Together strategies with a baseline condition during 7th grade language arts lessons. Results indicated that three students with various disabilities had higher percent intervals of on-task behavior and daily quiz scores during either Heads Together condition. Teacher satisfaction ratings suggested that Heads Together was easy to implement, and all three students preferred this strategy to baseline instruction. A discussion of study limitations, implications, and future research directions is included.


Numbered Heads Together Peer-assisted teaching Cooperative learning Teacher questions Language arts 


  1. Barbetta, P. M., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (1993). Effects of active student response during error correction on the acquisition, maintenance, and generalization of sight words by students with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26(1), 111–119.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbetta, P. M., & Heward, W. L. (1993). Effects of active student response during error correction on the acquisition and maintenance of geography facts by elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 3(3), 217–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barlow, D. H., & Hayes, S. C. (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12(2), 199–210.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell, J. M. (2004). Statistical comparison of four effect sizes for single-subject designs. Behavior Modification, 28(2), 234–246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapman, E. S., & Cope, M. T. (2004). Group reward contingencies and cooperative learning: Immediate and delayed effects on academic performance, self-esteem, and sociometric ratings. Social Psychology of Education, 7(1), 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Coutinho, M. J. (1986). Reading achievement of students identified as behaviorally disordered at the secondary level. Behavioral Disorders, 11(4), 200–207.Google Scholar
  8. Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M., & Brophy, J. E. (1979). Stability of teacher effects in junior high classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 71–75.Google Scholar
  9. Fielding, L. G., & Pearson, D. P. (1994). Reading comprehension: What works. Educational Leadership, 51(5), 62–68.Google Scholar
  10. Ghaith, G. M. (2001). Learners’ perceptions of their STAD cooperative experience. System, 29(2), 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunter, P. L., & Denny, R. K. (1998). Trends and issues in research regarding academic instruction of students with emotional behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 24(1), 44–50.Google Scholar
  12. Haydon, T., Conroy, M. A., Sindelar, P. T., Scott, T. M., Barber, B., & Orlando, A. M. (2010). A comparison of three types of opportunities to respond on student academic and social behaviors. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 18(1), 27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayling, C. C., Cook, C., Gresham, F. R., State, T., & Kern, L. (2008). An analysis of the status and stability of the behaviors of students with emotional and behavioral difficulties: A classroom direct observation study. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17(1), 24–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Housel, D. J. (2007). Document-based questions for reading comprehension and critical thinking. Westminster, CA: Teacher Created Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice, 38, 67–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. (1991). Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar
  17. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among pre-service and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169.Google Scholar
  18. Kazdin, A. E. (1982). Single case research designs. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kelshaw-Levering, K., Sterling-Turner, H. E., Henry, J. R., & Skinner, C. H. (2000). Randomized interdependent group contingencies: Group reinforcement with a twist. Psychology in the Schools, 37(6), 523–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  21. Kentucky Department of Education. (2008). Kentucky administrative regulations: Special education programs. Frankfort, Kentucky: Kentucky Department of Education.Google Scholar
  22. Lane, K., Wolery, M., Reichow, B., & Rogers, L. (2007). Describing baseline conditions: Suggestions for study reports. Journal of Behavioral Education, 16(3), 224–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lerner, J., & Johns, B. (2009). Learning disabilities and related mild disabilities: Characteristics, teaching strategies and new directions (11th ed.). NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  24. Lockheed, M. E., Abigail, M. H., Harris, A. M., & Nemceff, W. P. (1983). Sex and social influences: Does sex function as a status characteristic in mixed-sex groups of children? Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(6), 877–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maheady, L., Mallette, B., Harper, G. F., & Sacca, K. (1991). Heads together: A peer- mediated option for improving the academic achievement of heterogeneous learning groups. Remedial and Special Education, 12(2), 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maheady, L., Michielli-Pendl, J., Harper, G. F., & Mallette, B. (2006). The effects of numbered heads together with and without an incentive package on the science test performance of a diverse group of sixth graders. Journal of Behavioral Education, 15(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maheady, L., Michielli-Pendl, J., Mallette, B., & Harper, G. F. (2002). A collaborative research project to improve the academic performance of a diverse sixth grade science class. Teacher Education and Special Education, 2(1), 55–70.Google Scholar
  28. Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Reid, R., & Nelson, J. R. (2003). Status and trends of academic intervention research for students with emotional disturbance. Remedial and Special Education, 24(5), 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mortweet, S. L., Utley, C. A., Walker, D., Dawson, H. L., Reddy, S. S., Greenwood, C. R., et al. (1999). Classwide peer tutoring: Teaching students with mild retardation in inclusive classrooms. Exceptional Children, 65(4), 524–536.Google Scholar
  30. Nelson, J. R., Johnson, A., & Marchand-Martella, M. (1996). Effects of direct instruction, cooperative learning, and independent learning practices on the classroom behavior of students with behavioral disorders: A comparative analysis. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4(1), 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).Google Scholar
  32. Putnam, J. W. (1998). Cooperative learning and strategies for inclusion: Celebrating diversity in the classroom. Baltimore, ML: Brooks Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
  33. Ryan, J. B., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2004). Peer-mediated intervention studies on academic achievement for students with EBD: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 25(6), 330–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shaaban, K. (2006). An initial study of the effects of cooperative learning on reading comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, and motivation to read. Reading Psychology, 27(5), 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  36. Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). Exploring the relationship between increased opportunities to respond to academic requests and the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with EBD: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 22(2), 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sutherland, K. S., Wehby, J. H., & Gunter, P. L. (2000). The effectiveness of cooperative learning with students with emotional behavior and behavioral disorders: A literature review. Behavioral Disorders, 25(3), 225–238.Google Scholar
  38. Trout, A. L., Lienemann, T. O., Reid, R., & Epstein, M. H. (2007). A review of non-medication interventions to improve the academic performance of children and youth with ADHD. Remedial and Special Education, 28(4), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tucker, M., Sigafoos, J., & Bushell, H. (1998). Use of noncontingent reinforcement in the treatment of challenging behavior: A review and clinical guide. Behavior Modification, 22(4), 529–547.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. U. S. Department of Education. (2001). Twenty-third annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  41. Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Students demonstrating persistent low response to reading intervention: Three case studies. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(3), 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Webb, N. (1984). Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wehby, J. H., Lane, K. L., & Falk, K. B. (2003). Academic instruction for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders, 11(4), 194–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CECH University of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.SUNY FredoniaFredoniaUSA

Personalised recommendations