Increasing Appropriate Lunchroom

Behavior: A Praise Note System for

Elementary Students

Rikki K. Wheatley, Cade T. Charlton,

Richard P. West & Matthew J. Taylor

Center for the School of the Future at

Utah State University

Center for the School of the Futureat Utah State University

“The Center for the School of the Future (CSF) is a research center dedicated to improving the quality and effectiveness of education by identifying effective educational practices and supporting their dissemination and adoption in local circumstances.”

Introduction

• Behavior problems in schools are

well documented (Mayer, 2001; Turnbull et al., 2002)

• A variety of school-wide

intervention strategies address

these concerns (Lewis & Sugai, 1999; Oswald, Safran & Johnson, 2005; Walker & Horner, 1996)

School Common Areas

• Students may spend 1+ hours per

day in common areas (hallways,

lunchrooms, bus lines, playgrounds,

etc.)

• Misbehavior in school common

areas accounts for approximately

one-half of all problem behaviors in

many schools (Colvin, Sugai, Good, & Lee, 1997; Todd et al., 2002)

Common Complaints

– Talking, out-of seat & quarreling (McPherson et al., 1974)

– Noise level, running, shouting,

confusion, messiness, & supervisors

yelling (Samuels et al., 2001)

Explanations

• Large numbers of students

• Large amount of physical space

• Too few adults trained to deal with

problem behaviors

• Too few adults available (Todd et al., 2002)

• Unstructured routines

• Lack of clear expectations (Lewis & Garrison-Harrell, 1999)

School-wide Effects

• “Get-tough” policies lead to punitive

disciplinary measures that increase

problem behavior (Lewis & Garrison-Harrell,1999; Mayer & Leone, 1999; Van Acker & Grant, 1996)

• Disruptive behaviors in the lunchroom

are correlated with increased

disruption in the classroom (Samuels et al., 2001)

Strategies

• Positive methods for effectively

improving behavior for individual

students (Carr et al., 1999; Todd et al., 2008), and

groups of students (Lewis, Sugai & Colvin, 1998;

Sugai & Horner, 1999), in common areas (Kartub et al., 2000; Lewis, Colvin & Sugai, 2000, Nelson, Colvin & Smith,

1996) as well as in the classroom (Skinner et al., 2002; Todd et al., 2008)

Four Elements of Effective Instruction

• Clear Expectations

• Skill Building through Opportunities

to Respond

• Rewards and Recognition

• Positive and Trusting Student-

Teacher Relationships(West, Smith & Taylor, 2004)

Current Study

• Demonstrate effectiveness of simple

behavior management program

founded on the four principles for

effective instruction

• Provide guidance for successful

implementation of necessary

components of a Praise Note system

(intensity, delivery, and tracking)

MethodParticipants

• Approximately 200 first through fifth grade

students at a rural elementary school in

Northern Utah

• The students were predominantly white (80%),

and from middle to lower-middle socioeconomic

backgrounds

Setting

• Elementary school lunchroom

• Regularly scheduled lunch periods

• Approximately three grades in the room at a time

Method

Design

Multiple baseline across three target

behaviors

– Littering

– Inappropriate sitting

– Running

Praise Note System

• Training and modeling sessions (clear

expectations & skill building)

• Praise Notes accompanied by specific

verbal commendations (recognition &

positive relationships)

• Public Posting and Tangible Rewards

(rewards and recognition)

Procedure

The intervention consisted of three basic components:

Training

Faculty and Staff Training

• Clarified Expectations

• Taught to deliver Praise Notes

correctly (student’s name, praise

statement, and description of

behavior that was appropriate)

– Frequent delivery (every 2-3 minutes)

– Target students who needed extra help

Training

Student Training

• Clarified Expectations

• 20 minutes for each behavior the

day before each phase of the

intervention began

– Introduction and modeling

– Opportunities to practice

– Chance to earn a Praise Note

Reward System

• Drawing (2-3 tickets each day)

• Public Posting

• Group Reward (extra recess, ice

cream party, etc.)

• Weekly teacher drawing

Results

The intervention was successful across all

three behaviors

•Littering: 96% decrease (34.3 pieces during

baseline to 1.3 pieces during intervention)

•Inappropriate Sitting: 64 % decrease (65.5

instances during baseline to 23.3 instances

during intervention)

•Running: 75% decrease (34 instances

during baseline to 8.5 instances during

intervention)

Discussion

• Evidence of an effective program

based on the four elements

• Guidance for program implementation

– Training model

– Delivery method

– Contingencies

– Faculty buy-in

Discussion Continued

• Intensity

– Optimal intensity unknown

– 55% of students received a Praise Note

each week

– Practical for staff and teachers to

manage with help

Future Research• Contribution of the four elements of

effective instruction on the overall

quality of the learning environment

• Praise Note applications targeted to

other school common areas

• Conducted in larger schools to

investigate practicality

• Systematically vary intensity to

discover optimal intensity levels