Good Behavior Game

« Back to list

Category	Type	Target Age Group	Setting	Outcomes	Source of Rating
Promising Programs	Antisocial Behavior	Elementary School	Classroom	Less aggressive and shy behaviors Better peer nominations of aggressive behavior Reduction in levels of aggression for males	Close Blueprints for Violence Prevention (Blueprints) The Blueprints for Violence Prevention list has been developed by a research team headed by Delbert Elliott, Ph.D. at the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence at the University of Colorado. For Blueprints to certify a brand name program as “model,” the program must demonstrate its effects on problem behaviors with a rigorous experimental design, show that its effects persist after youth leave the program and be successfully replicated at least once. In order for a brand name program to be certified as “promising,” the program must demonstrate effects using a rigorous experimental design. The Blueprints Web site (www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/) lists 11 “model” programs and 19 “promising” programs. Selection Criteria: Lasting positive effects in well designed evaluations & emphasis on replication. Applicability:  Excellent for crime, violence, delinquency & substance abuse. Reliability:  Excellent Currency:  Up to Date Advantages:  Easy to use. Plentiful peer and tech support. Predictability of outcomes. Limitations:  Covers only a small number of brand name programs. Blueprints

Description:

The Good Behavior Game is a 1st-2nd grade classroom management strategy for decreasing aggressive/disruptive student behavior. In some cases, it is implemented in both 1st and 2nd grade; in other cases, it is implemented only in 1st grade.

The teacher initially divides her class into three teams, each with an equal proportion of boys and girls, and aggressive versus well-behaved children. The teacher then clearly describes (i) good student behaviors (e.g. working quietly on assigned tasks), and (ii) disruptive behaviors (e.g. talking out of trn, fighting etc.). Teams receive check marks on a posted chart when one of their members exhibits a disruptive behavior. Teams that receive few check marks are rewarded at the end of each game period, and consistent winners are again rewarded at the end of the week – at first, with tangible rewards (e.g. classroom activities, stickers, erasers), and later during the year with more abstract ones (e.g. gold stars). The Game is played for ten minutes three times a week early in the year, gradually extended in time, and eventually incorporated into the whole day and entire week.

Target Population

Early elementary schoolchildren (K-6)

 

---

References and/or Published Evaluations

Kellam, Sheppard G., C. Hendricks Brown, Jeanne Poduska, Nicholas Ialongo, Hanno Petras, Wei Wang, Peter Toyinbo, Holly C. Wilcox, Carla Ford, and Amy Windham. “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, 95S, 2008, S5-S28.

Kellam, Sheppard G. and James C. Anthony. “Targeting Early Antecedents to Prevent Tobacco Smoking: Findings From an Epidemiologically Based Randomized Field Trial.” American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 88, No. 10, October 1998, pp 1490-1495.

Furr-Holden, C. Debra M., Nicholas S. Ialongo, James C. Anthony, Hanno Petras, and Sheppard G. Kellam. “Developmentally inspired drug prevention: Middle school outcomes in a school-based randomized prevention trial.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. Issue 73, 2004, pp. 149-158.

Ialongo, Nick, Jeanne Poduska, Lisa Werthamer, and Sheppard Kellam. “The Distal Impact of Two First-Grade Preventive Interventions on Conduct Problems and Disorder in Early Adolescence.” Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. Volume 9, Issue 2, Fall 2001, pp. 146-160.

Storr, Carla L., Nicholas S. Ialongo, Sheppard G. Kellam, and James C. Anthony. “A randomized controlled trial of two primary school intervention strategies to prevent early onset tobacco smoking.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence. Issue 66, 2002, pp 51-60.

_ Back to Top

---

Additional Information

Provided by trainer Claire Richardson, September 2010

• Has program been replicated at other sites? If so, how many and where?
  Yes. All over the United States.
  

• Is there a formal curriculum or program guidelines in place? What is the approximate cost for these materials?
  The Good Behavior Game costs approximately $500 per student per year to implement in the studies below (including the cost of training and mentoring the teachers, and monitoring their implementation). It may cost less than this when implemented on a larger scale outside a study setting.
  

• What kind of training and technical assistance is available for this program?
  Teachers receive approximately 40 hours of training in the proper implementation of the Game, and supportive mentoring during the school year. Optimum number is 20-50 teachers per training.
  

• Once the program has been implemented, can an organization obtain assistance with fidelity monitoring or quality assurance?
  Yes, during and after the first year; available by phone or e-mail.
  

• Which local stakeholders have to participate to make this program successful?
  Schools are most successful when principals, teachers and school counselors provide support.
  

• Do you recommend the use of risk assessment tool in identifying referrals for this program? If so, which one?
  We recommend use of The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) assessment tool to get a baseline.

_ Back to Top