Behavior Modification in the Classroom

By: N. Mather and Sam Goldstein

Behavior modification assumes that observable and measurable behaviors are good targets
for change. All behavior follows a set of consistent rules. Methods can be developed for
defining, observing, and measuring behaviors, as well as designing effective interventions.
Behavior modification techniques never fail. Rather, they are either applied inefficiently or
inconsistently, which leads to less than desired change. All behavior is maintained, changed,
or shaped by the consequences of that behavior. Although there are certain limits, such as
temperamental or emotional influences related to ADHD or depression, all children function
more effectively under the right set of consequences. Reinforcers are consequences that
strengthen behavior. Punishments are consequences that weaken behavior. Students'
behaviors are managed and changed by the consequences of classroom behavior. To
manage behavior through consequences, use this multi-step process:

1. The problem must be defined, usually by count or description.

2. Design a way to change the behavior.
3. Identify an effective reinforcer.
4. Apply the reinforcer consistently to shape or change behavior.

Consequences of behavior are directly related to the events that either come immediately
before or after them. Table 4.2 provides examples of behavioral outcomes as they relate to
various events.

Table 4.1. Popular models and techniques for dealing with discipline referrals

Model Techniques emphasized

Focusing on Prevention

Preventative
Effective teaching practices, frequent monitoring, clear rules and
classroom
procedures, social praise, and so forth
management

Systematic reinforcement, modeling of prosocial behavior, verbal

Prosocial behavior
instruction, role playing

Classroom moral discussions of real-life dilemmas, hypothetical

Moral education situations, and literature; role playing; student participation in school
government

Social problem Direct teaching of SPS skills (e.g. alternative thinking, means-ends
solving (SPS) thinking), self- instruction training, dialoguing
Effective
Values clarification activities, active listening, communication and
communication
interpersonal skills training for students and teachers
models

Focusing on Correction and Control of Misbehavior

Direct instruction; reinforcement techniques, including social praise,

material reinforcers, and tokens; punishment-oriented techniques,
Behavior
including verbal reprimand, response cost, and time-out; group
modification
contingency techniques such as the Good Behavior Game; behavioral
contracting

Teacher assertion, systematic use of behavior modification techniques,

Assertive discipline
continuous monitoring

Confrontation questioning, classroom meetings, classroom moral

discussions, social problem solving, behavioral contracting, logical
Reality therapy
consequences, time-out, preventative techniques such as democratic
governance

Focus on Treatment

Social skills Direct instruction, modeling and rehearsal, coaching, self-instruction,

training manipulation of antecedents and consequences

Aggression
Social skills training techniques, self- instruction (e.g. anger control
replacement
training), moral discussions
training

Parent management
Parent training in application of behavioral techniques
training

Variety of therapeutic and educational techniques, depending on the

Family therapy
particular model

Behavior therapy Variety of cognitive, behavioral, and operant techniques

From Bear, G.G. (1990). Modeks and techniques that focus on prevention. In A. Thomas & J.
Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (p. 652). Silver Spring, MID: National
Association of School Psychologists; Copyright 1990 by the National Association of School
Psychologists. Reprinted by permission of publisher.

Reinforcement and punishment follow a clear set of basic principles:

1. reinforcement or punishment always follows behavior,

2. reinforcement or punishment follows the target behavior as soon as possible,
3. reinforcement or punishment fits the target behavior and must be meaningful to the
child, and
4. multiple reinforcers, or punishments are likely more effective than single reinforcers
or punishments.

Reinforcement

Table 4.2. Technique, behavior, consequence, and probable effect

Probable future
Classification Exhibited behavior Consequences
effect on behavior

Positive Jane will continue

Jane cleans her room. Jane's parents praise her.
reinforcement to clean her room.

Carmen will
Positive Carmen brushes her teeth Carmen receives a continue to brush
reinforcement after meals. nickel each time. her teeth after
meals.

Rob will continue

Positive Rob works quietly at his The teacher praises and
to work quietly at
reinforcement seat. rewards Rob.
his seat.

Jason complains that Jason's parents allow

Negative older boys consistently him to remain at home Jason will continue
reinforcement beat him up, and he because of his to miss school.
refuses to attend school. complaints.

Balin will have

Balin complains of Balin is allowed to go to
Negative headaches
headaches when it is time bed without doing his
reinforcement whenever there is
to do homework. homework.
homework to do.
 Jim will stop
Jim washes his father's Jim's car washing
Extinction washing his father's
car. behavior is ignored.
car.

Carmen will stop

Carmen puts glue on
Extinction Carmen is ignored. putting glue on
Joe's seat.
Joe's seat.

Marta is spanked each Marta will not sit

Marta sits on the arm of
Punishment time she sits on the arm on the arm of the
the chair.
of the chair. chair.

The teacher administers Takeo will not put

Takeo puts Gwen's
Punishment the paddle to Takeo's Gwen's pigtail in
pigtails in the paint.
posterior. the paint.

From Walker, J.E., & Shea, T.M. (1991). Behavior management: A practical approach for educators (5th
ed.). New York: Macmillan; adapted by permission.

Although reinforcement and punishment can be equally effective in reducing specific target
behaviors in the classroom, reinforcement is by far more effective in helping children
develop alternative, more functional behaviors. When Jeremy was in third grade, his teacher
instituted a procedure in which he would receive a tally mark if she looked over and saw
that he was tipping back in his chair. She placed 4 Xs under each chair leg to remind him
not to lean back. A more positive approach would be to let Jeremy earn a tally mark each
time she looked over and saw that all four legs were down. This would reinforce the desired
behavior. It is important to always begin with a number of reinforcing strategies before
resorting to punishment as a means of reducing unwanted or aversive classroom behaviors.

Schedules
Schedules define and identify the amount of work required or the time that must elapse
between reinforcers. Some schedules are continuous, providing a reinforcement or
punishment every time the target behavior occurs. Fixed or variable interval schedules are
time related, and fixed or variable ratio schedules are related to how much work is
completed. Fixed schedules result in higher rates of performance than continuous schedules.
In classroom settings, most teachers use fixed ratio interval schedules. They are effective
because the child knows exactly what is expected and the requirements of performance are
clearly spelled out. Keep in mind that variable schedules are not as good for shaping new
behaviors but are excellent for maintaining well-learned behaviors.
A simple system to evaluate the most common classroom problems (e.g. talking out, being
out of the seat, not focusing or paying attention, disruptive behavior) appears in Figure 4.4.
Information obtained is usually observed at 15-second intervals. If any of the behaviors
occur, whether once or more than once, a single notation is made for that interval.

Positive reinforcement
The appropriate application of positive reinforcement has repeatedly been demonstrated to
increase both on-task behavior and work completion (for reviews, see Barkley, 1990;
DuPaul & Stoner, 1994; Goldstein, 1995; and Walker & Walker, 1991). In the early
elementary school grades, teachers exhibit a significant degree of positive reinforcement for
desired behaviors (White, 1975). That is, when a desired behavior is exhibited, teachers
frequently respond with a consequence that is likely to increase the reoccurrence of that
behavior. Jeremy's first-grade teacher offered frequent praise when he was sitting quietly in
his seat.
By middle elementary school and through secondary school, however, teachers begin
paying increasingly greater attention to undesirable behaviors and less attention to
appropriate behaviors. Unfortunately, paying attention to the undesirable behavior causes it
to cease in the short run but occur more frequently in the long run.
Children with ADHD may often be more interested in tasks other than those on which the
teacher is focusing (Douglas, 1972). This leads to significantly more nonproductive activity
and uneven, unpredictable classroom behavior. Interestingly, the overall rates of negative
teacher-child interactions involving typical students are also higher in classrooms containing
children with ADHD (Campbell, Endman, & Bernfeld, 1977). According to reports, teachers
are more intense and controlling when interacting with children with ADHD. Within school
settings, children with ADHD appear to experience negative consequences because of their
temperament and a performance history that often involves beginning but not completing
tasks. Many teachers in this circumstance unfortunately tend to focus on the misbehavior
rather than on the reduction or termination of the behavior. This may further disrupt the
classroom by disturbing other students.
This naturally occurring pattern of teachers paying less attention to desirable behavior and
more attention to undesirable behavior, as children progress through school, places children
with ADHD at a greater disadvantage than their classmates. In the first few grades, when
teachers appear to be making a conscientious effort to positively reinforce their students,
the child with ADHD often does not receive his or her share of reinforcement. In the later
grades, as teachers exhibit less positive reinforcement, perhaps because they feel that it is
not needed, the child with ADHD is placed at even greater risk.
Positive reinforcement programs should begin at the level at which children can succeed and
be positively reinforced. All too often, teachers set up wonderful behavioral programs but
set initial criteria for success too high. The child with ADHD in this system rarely reaches
success. Problem behavior must be defined operationally and then a level of baseline
occurrence must be obtained. At first, provide reinforcement when the child is at or slightly
better than baseline. For example, in first grade, Jeremy was out of his seat 10 times during
a work period, so his teacher provided reinforcement when he was out of his seat no more
than eight times. As the child succeeds, the necessary criteria for reinforcement can be
gradually increased, requiring fewer out-of-seat behaviors during a given time period.

Response discrepancy observation method

You may also want to determine the amount of time a student exhibits on- and off-task
behavior. One simple behavioral observation method is called response discrepancy because
it allows you to record a discrepancy between the target student and a typical class peer
(Rhode, Jenson, & Reavis, 1992). Figure 4.5 presents a form to use for this system. To
begin, match the target student with a same-sex peer who exhibits typical classroom
behavior. Next, check off the type of activity: class, small-group activity or independent
activity. The observation period lasts 15 minutes, and behavior is recorded at 10-second
intervals (for a total of 90 intervals). The left side of the box is used for the target student
and the right side is used for the classroom peer. At the end of each 10-second interval,
record a + for on-task activities or - for off-task activities for each student. Ignore behaviors
between the recording points. At the end of the 15-minute observation period, compute the
percentage of on-task behavior for each student. This may be accomplished using the
formula provided in Figure 4.6 (Rhode et al., 1992).
 Figure 4.6. Operational definitions of behaviors in the TOAD system

Spoken words, either friendly, neutral, or negative in content, are directed at

Talking Out either the teacher without first obtaining permission to speak or unsolicited at
classmates during inappropriate times or during work periods

The child is not supporting his or her weight with the chair. Up on knees does
Out of Seat
not count as out-of-seat behavior.

The child is not attending either to independent work or to a group activity.

Attention The child is therefore engaged in an activity other than that which has been
Problem directed and is clearly different from what the other children are doing. This
includes the child's not following teacher directions.

The child's actions result in consequences that appear to be interrupting other

Disruption children's work. These behaviors might include noises or physical contact.
They may be intentional or unintentional.

Figure 4.4. The Talking Out/Out of Seat/Attention Problem/Disruption (TOAD) System. (From Goldstein,
S., & Goldstein, M. [1990]. Managing attention disorders in children: A guide for practitioners [pp. 93-
94]. New York: John Wiley & Sons. This material is used by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.)

Figure 4.5. Behavior observation form.

From Rhode, G., Jenson, W.R., & Reavis, H.K. [1992]. The tough kid book: Practical classroom management
strategies [p. 271. Longmont, CO: Sopris West; Reprinted with permission of Sopris West, Inc.
When Jeremy was in third grade, a volunteer completed this type of observation for Jeremy
and a peer while they were engaged in a small-group activity. Jeremy had been on task for
34 of the intervals. He had been off task for 56 of the 90 intervals. His total time on task
was 34 / 90 X 100 or approximately 38% of the time.
In contrast, Jeremy's peer had been on task for 78 of the 90 intervals and had been off task
for 12 of the intervals. His total time on task was then 78/90 X 100 or approximately 87%.
As a general guideline, if a student is on task less than 60% of the time and the peer's
average is 85% or more, the target student's attention to the task is problematic. If both
students' on-task behavior is below 60%, the problem may be more related to classroom
management (Rhode et al., 1992). When compared with his peer, Jeremy appears to be
much more distractible and off task.
As a general rule, observe a student in two different settings or two different types of
activities. Some students are only off task and distractible when presented with tasks they
find uninteresting. Other students are distractible only during specific subjects, such as in a
math class. Keep in mind that students' attention varies depending on the type of task, the
difficulty of the material, the type of activity, the setting, and the classroom management
skills of the teacher.
Positive reinforcement should follow immediately after good behavior. It should be specific
and initially continuous, slowly moving to an intermittent schedule. Material reinforcers
provide the child with something tangible. Social reinforcers are more versatile, and, even if
material reinforcers are used, a kind word from the teacher should always accompany them.
It is also easier to increase behavior than decrease it. Thus, when choosing a target
behavior, it is preferable to focus on behaviors to be increased rather than on those to be
decreased. Shea and Bauer (1987) described the following process to apply positive
reinforcement effectively:

 Select a target behavior to increase, define the behavior, and choose a reinforcer.
 Observe the child and watch for the behavior.
 Reinforce the target behavior every time it is exhibited.
 Comment in a positive way about the behavior when providing reinforcement.
 Be enthusiastic -and interested.
 Offer assistance.
 Vary the reinforcer.

Rhode, Jenson, and Reavis (1992) provided a well-defined model for reinforcement in the
classroom. This model, presented in Table 4.3, is an excellent summary of reinforcement
contingencies.
Be certain to select reinforcers that are age appropriate and not necessarily time-limited.
Most important, do not deny students their basic rights (e.g. lunch, bathroom use,
playground time) and then define these rights as positive reinforcers. At times, the use of a
reinforcement list or menu can facilitate choosing a reinforcer that is meaningful to the
child. You can provide a list of enjoyable or free time activities and ask the child to rank
them by preference. You can ask the child what he or she might do with free time, where he
or she might like to sit, what he or she might like to learn about, and also what kinds of
activities make him or her feel needed, proud, and important in the classroom. Finally, one
question to consider inquiring of every student is "'What is the very best reward in this class
that you could get for good work and behavior?"
Click to see Figure 4.6. Formula for the response discrepancy observation method.

Selection of reinforcements
Some consequences that teachers provide for children are irrelevant and neither strengthen
nor weaken the behavior they follow (Bushell, 1973). Many teachers believe that placing
stars on a chart as a reward or providing a prize are consequences that work with all
children. Some children are motivated by these consequences; others are not. Furthermore,
children with ADHD may find these consequences salient one day but lose interest in them
quickly the next day. Therefore, the fact that certain consequences follow a child's behavior
may neither strengthen nor weaken the chances for that behavior to reoccur. Bushell
(1973) referred to consequences that are irrelevant as noise, neutral consequences that
have no effect on the behavior. Teachers must evaluate whether chosen consequences are
positively reinforcing or simply noise. A reinforcement menu or inventory completed jointly
by you and the child ensures that the former rather than the latter will occur. Sample
reinforcement menus across grade levels appear in Figure 4.7.
Ms. Adams met with Jeremy when he was in her second-grade class to select some
reinforcers that would increase his time on task. Jeremy quickly offered several suggestions.
He wanted time to look through books about dinosaurs, to read joke books, and to play with
blocks. He also wanted time for drawing and art projects. Ms. Adams explained that each
morning they would decide what assignments needed to be completed before break. When
he completed the assignments, he could choose his reward. Ms. Adams also adapted the
assignments. Jeremy was expected to write in his journal, but he could answer the
questions about his reading orally.
Paine, Radicchi, Rosellini, Deutchman, and Darch (1983) found that the five most frequent
reinforcement ideas suggested by elementary school students were additional recess, free
time in class, material reinforcers, field trips, and games in class. Intermediate grade
students more frequently favored activities that involved interaction with teachers, including
acting as an assistant in grading papers, carrying on a discussion, or playing a game on a
one-to-one basis. As previously discussed, reinforcers take on different values for different
individuals.
You must develop a hierarchy of the behaviors that you would like to see the child exhibit.
For example, in response to out-of-seat behavior, many teachers may initiate a
reinforcement system to increase in-seat behavior. Although the child may earn multiple
reinforcers for remaining in his seat, this does not guarantee that he will engage in
constructive or appropriate behavior while remaining seated. Often, multiple reinforcers and
multiple levels of reinforcement must be initiated. For example, in first grade, Jeremy was
provided with one reinforcer for sitting and a second reinforcer for working while sitting.
Robinson, Newby, and Ganzell (1981) used a token reinforcement system for successful
completion of four tasks, two involving learning to read and using vocabulary words and
sentences and two involving teaching these tasks to other students. Tokens were exchanged
for access to a pinball machine or electronic game. Using a reversal design, the token
intervention program resulted in a nine-fold increase in the mean number of tasks
completed over the baseline level and significant improvement in performance on the school
district's standardized weekly reading level examinations. A reduction in disruptive behavior
was also anecdotally reported. This reinforcement system was managed by a single teacher
working with 18 children, all of whom had received diagnoses of ADHD. Walker and Shea
(1991) also described an in-depth model of structuring a token economy successfully in the
classroom.

Table 4.3. IFEED-AV rules

Immediately The I stands for reinforcing the student immediately. The longer the teacher
waits to reinforce a student, the less effective the reinforcer will be. This is
particularly true of younger students or students with severe disabilities. For
example, reinforcer effectiveness is limited if the student has to wait until
 the end of the week to receive it.

The F stands for frequently reinforcing a student. It is especially important

to frequently reinforce when a student is learning a new behavior or skill. If
reinforcers are not given frequently enough, the student may not produce
enough of a new behavior for it to become well-established. The standard
rule is three or four positive reinforcers for every one negative consequence
Frequently (including negative verbal comments) that the teacher delivers. If, in the
beginning, there is a great deal of inappropriate behavior to which the
teacher must attend, positive reinforcement and recognition of appropriate
behavior must be increased accordingly to maintain the desired three or four
positives to each negative. The reinforcer can be a simple social reinforcer
such as, "Good job. You finished your math assignment."

The first E stands for enthusiasm in the delivery of the reinforcer. It is easy
to simply hand an edible reinforcer to a student; it takes more effort to pair it
with an enthusiastic comment. Modulation in the voice and excitement with
a congratulatory air convey that the student has done something important.
Enthusiasm
For most teachers, this seems artificial at first. However, with practice,
enthusiasm makes the difference between a reinforcer delivered in a drab,
uninteresting way and one that indicates that something important has taken
place in which the teacher is interested.

It is also important for the teacher to look the student in the eyes when
giving a reinforcer, even if the student is not looking at him or her. Like
Eye contact enthusiasm, eye contact suggests that a student is special and has the
teacher's undivided attention. Over time, eye contact may become
reinforcing in and of itself.

Describe the D stands for describing the behavior that is being reinforced. The
behavior younger the student or the more severe the disability, the more
important it is to describe the appropriate behavior that is being
reinforced. Teachers often assume that students know what it is they
are doing right that has resulted in the delivery of reinforcement.
However, this is often not the case. The student may not know why
reinforcement is being delivered or may think that it is being delivered
for some behavior other than what the teacher intended to reinforce.
Even if the student does know what behavior is being reinforced,
describing it is important. First, describing the behavior highlights and
emphasizes the behavior the teacher wishes to reinforce. Second, if the
behavior has several steps, describing it helps to review the specific
expectations for the student. An example is, "Wow, you got yourself
dressed - look at you! You have your socks on, your shoes are laced,
your pants are on with a belt, and your shirt has all the buttons fastened
and is tucked in." This is much more effective than saying, "Good job
 dressing."

Building excitement and anticipation for the earning of a reinforcer can

motivate students to do their very best. The more "hype" the teacher uses,
Anticipation
the more excited students become to earn the reinforcer. Presenting the
potential reinforcer in a mysterious way also builds anticipation.

Just like adults, students get tired of the same things. A certain reinforcer
may be highly desired, but, after repeated exposure, it loses its effectiveness.
It is easy to get caught up in giving students the same old reinforcers time
Variety and time again. However, variety is the spice of life for everyone. Generally,
when teachers are asked why they do not vary their reinforcers, they indicate
that it worked very well once. It is necessary to change reinforcers
frequently to make the reinforcement more effective.
From Rhode, G., Jenson, W.R., & Reavis, H.K. (1992). The tough kid book: Practical classroom
management strategies (p. 34). Longmont, CO: Sopris West; Reprinted with permission from Sopris
West, Inc.

Negative reinforcement
Negative reinforcement requires the child to work for the removal of an in-place, unpleasant
consequence. The child's goal is to get rid of something that is unpleasant rather than to
earn something that is desirable. In a negative reinforcement model, instead of working to
earn a positive consequence, the child works to distance him- or herself from an aversive
consequence. Negative reinforcement is often used in the classroom to manage problem
behaviors. Teachers inadvertently pay attention to a child who may not be complying and
withdraw their attention contingent on the child's compliance. Surprisingly, this strengthens
rather than weakens the noncompliant behavior. The next time a similar situation occurs,
the child again will not comply until confronted with the aversive consequence (i.e. the
teacher's attention). Negative reinforcement is often seductive and coercive for teachers. It
works in the short run but in the long run is likely to strengthen rather than weaken the
undesirable behavior.
Many of the same variables that affect positive reinforcement-immediacy, frequency,
consistency---affect negative reinforcement. Behaviors that in and of themselves may not
be negative become negative reinforcers when paired with certain events. For example, a
teacher approaching a child who is not working quickly becomes a negative reinforcer, even
though the action itself, the teacher walking up to the child, does not have a negative
connotation (Favell, 1977). Clark and Elliott (1988) found that negative reinforcement was
rated by teachers as the most frequently used classroom intervention. Children with ADHD
often experience negative reinforcement because of their temperament, which makes it
difficult for them to complete tasks; their consequent learning history reinforces them for
beginning but rarely for finishing.
Reinforcement Menu: Reinforcement Menu: Third Reinforcement Menu: Tenth-
Kindergarten Grade Grade Geometry

Main Courses Main Courses Main Courses

 Play the piano  Go to the library to work on  Challenge someone to a

  Paint
 Look out of the a special project related to a game of chess
window study unit  Use the computer
 Use the toys at the  Arrange the game shelf and  Do extra credit problems to
back of the room pick a game to play raise grade
 Work with puzzles  Listen to a story with  Make up a quiz and give it to
 Use model clay earphones the class
 Move a chair to  Work in the art corner  Sit at the teacher's desk
another place  Read and record a favorite while doing homework
 Choose a carpet piece story with expression and  Prepare the bulletin board
to sit on clarity using display of student's
 Use the computer  Work on scrapbook for choice
 Cut and paste history project using  Write a letter
 Talk to a classmate magazines in the room  Read
 Drink  Leave 5 minutes early for  Play charades
 Hug lunch  Discuss past or forthcoming
 Use colored chalk  Be line captain athletic or social events
 Swing feet  Be in charge of taking  Have a creative exhibit
 Walk around in the attendance period (i.e. show-and-tell for
back of the room  Get a drink at any time older students)
 Watch a science video without asking permission  Be excused 15 minutes early
 Sing  Be in charge of passing out to clean erasers and
papers and other class chalkboard
materials
 Be excused 15 minutes
early to clean erasers and
chalkboard

Daily Specials Daily Specials Daily Specials

 Monday: Visit first  Monday: Watch a video  Monday: Appear as a guest

grade  Tuesday: Use the computer lecturer in another math
 Tuesday: Finger paint  Wednesday: Be a group class
 Wednesday: Play a leader  Tuesday: Do a special
game with teacher  Thursday: Add another crossword puzzle involving
 Thursday: Make a piece to class mural geometry concepts
mural  Friday: Help plan the Friday  Wednesday: Play a math
 Friday: Use the group activity game with another student
computer  Thursday: Construct a
special paper model using
geometrical figures
 Friday: Solve mysteries
involving mathematical
solutions

Figure 4.7. Sample reinforcement menu. (Toward Positive Classroom Discipline, 3rd ed. by H.F. Clarizio 0
1987. Reprinted by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.) Figure 4.7.

A number of simple, effective ways exist to deal with this problem. If you are using negative
reinforcement, pay attention to the student until the assignment is completed. Although this
too is negative reinforcement, it teaches the child that the only way to get rid of the
aversive consequence (i.e. your attention) is not just to start but to complete the task at
hand. As an example, you may move the student's desk next to your desk until that
particular piece of work is completed.
A second alternative involves the use of differential attention or ignoring. The
term differential attention applies when ignoring is used as the negative consequence for
exhibiting the undesirable behavior, and attention is used as a positive consequence for
exhibiting the competing desirable behavior. This is an active process in which the teacher
ignores the child engaged in an off-task activity but pays attention immediately when the
child begins working. Many teachers avoid interaction with the child when he or she is on
task for fear of interrupting the child's train of thought. It is important, however, to
reinforce the child when working so that a pattern of working to earn positive reinforcement
rather than working to avoid negative reinforcement is developed.
Secondary school teachers at times complain that if they ignore the adolescent with ADHD
during an hour-long class, they never have the opportunity to pay positive attention as the
student may never exhibit positive behavior. Waiting, however, even if one has to wait until
the next day, is more effective in the long run than paying attention to off-task behavior.
You need to make a distinction between off-task behavior that disrupts and off-task
behavior that does not disrupt. Differential attention works effectively for the latter.
However, when a child is off task and disturbing his or her neighbor, you may find that
being a negative reinforcer holds an advantage in stemming the tide of an off-task behavior
that involves other students as well. Differential attention alone has been demonstrated to
be ineffective in maintaining high rates of on-task behavior and work productivity for
students with ADHD (Rosen, O'Leary, Joyce, Conway, & Pfiffner, 1984). In part, we suggest
that many factors other than teacher attention maintain and influence student behavior.
Differential attention is a powerful intervention when used appropriately. Once the strategy
of ignoring inappropriate behavior is employed, it must be continued despite escalation . If
not, you run the risk of intermittently reinforcing the negative behavior, thereby
strengthening its occurrence. For example, if you decide to use differential attention for a
child's out-of-seat behavior but become sufficiently frustrated after the child is out of his or
her seat for 10 minutes and respond by directing attention to the child, the behavior will be
reinforced rather than extinguished. The 10 minutes of ignoring will quickly be lost in the
one incident of negative attention. If the teacher yells, "Sit down," the child has received
the desired attention by persisting in a negative behavior.
Madsen, Becker, and Thomas (1968) evaluated rules, praise, and ignoring for inappropriate
behavior in two children in a typical second-grade classroom and in one child in a
kindergarten class. The results indicated that in the absence of praise, rules and ignoring
were ineffective. Inappropriate behavior decreased only after praise was added. Others
have demonstrated the importance of praise in a general education classroom (Thomas,
Becker, & Armstrong, 1968). Specifically, whenever teacher approval was withdrawn,
disruptive behaviors increased.
Overall, however, the research on differential attention with children with ADHD has been
inconsistent. Rosen and colleagues (1984) evaluated the results of praise and reprimands in
maintaining appropriate social and academic behaviors in second- and third-grade children
with ADHD. Children's on-task behavior and academic performance deteriorated when
negative feedback was withdrawn but not when positive feedback was omitted. Students'
on-task behavior remained high, even after 9 days of no praise from the teacher. Acker and
O'Leary (1988)demonstrated that the use of only reprimands for behavior management
without positive consequences does not lead to dramatic improvement in on-task
performance when praise is added. Dramatic deterioration in on-task behavior was observed
when reprimands were subsequently withdrawn, even though the teacher was still
delivering praise for appropriate behavior.
Children with ADHD perform as well as typical children with a continuous schedule of
reinforcement but perform significantly worse with a partial schedule of reinforcement (e.g.
reinforcement is provided only sometimes), which is typically found in most classrooms
(Douglas & Parry, 1983). Praise is important for the development of other attributes in
human beings, such as self-esteem, school attitude, and motivation toward academics
(Redd, Morris, & Martin, 1975). In addition, the opposite is also true: A large amount of
punishment can negatively affect emotional development and self-esteem.

Modeling
Through modeling, observation, and then imitation, children develop new behaviors.
Modeling can be as simple as having a child watch another child sharpen a pencil. By
watching the model, a child can learn a new behavior, inhibit another behavior, or
strengthen previously learned behavior (e.g. saying "thank you"). To use modeling
effectively, you must determine whether a child has the capacity to observe and then
imitate the model. In classroom settings, a student's response to modeling is influenced by
three factors: 1) the characteristics of the model (e.g. is this a student whom the other
students like and respect?), 2) the characteristics of the observer (e.g. is this child capable
of observing and imitating the behavior), and 3) the positive or negative consequences
associated with the behavior. Children are more likely to respond to teacher modeling when
they view their teachers as competent, nurturing, supportive, fun, and interesting. Children
are also more likely to imitate behavior that results in a positive consequence.
Younger children have been reported as more frequently imitating others than older
children. Children consistently model someone whom they value or look up to. They also
imitate the behavior of a same-sex child more often than that of a different-sex child. They
model someone whom they perceive as successful and socially valued regardless of whether
the teacher perceives that child as successful and socially valued. Finally, if a child observes
a model being reinforced or punished for certain behavior, this influences the likelihood that
the child will then model that behavior.
Modeling is a powerful tool, often underutilized by teachers. When teachers are cheerful and
enthusiastic, their attitudes are contagious. When they are respectful of students, students
respect each other. When teachers are patient, fair, consistent, and optimistic, their
students exhibit these traits as well. Teacher behavior sets the tone for the classroom
environment.
In 1970, Kaplan described a ripple effect in transactions between teachers and misbehaving
students that affected not only those students but also the entire classroom. Teachers who
were firm reduced the problem behaviors both from the first child who misbehaved and
from those students who saw the initial problem behavior. When teachers enforced rules,
the ripple effect worked in their favor. When they failed to follow through with rules, the
ripple effect worked against them. Furthermore, the misbehaving student's social standing
in the classroom was also an issue. When teachers successfully managed the behavior of
high-status troublemakers, their control tended to benefit the entire classroom. Likewise,
the ripple effect when high-status offenders were not managed increased negative
behaviors among others. Finally, when managing a disruptive behavior, it is important to
focus on tasks and behaviors rather than on approval. In the latter situation, teachers may
focus on their relationship with the disruptive student when trying to get that student to
behave. This strategy, unfortunately, is usually ineffective over the long term.

Shaping
Waiting for the appropriate target behavior or something close to that behavior to occur
before reinforcing the behavior is referred to as shaping. Shaping can be used to establish
behaviors that are not routinely exhibited. Walker and Shea (1991) described the steps to
effective shaping:

1. Select a target behavior and define it.

 2. Observe how often the behavior is exhibited.
3. Select reinforcers.
4. Decide on close approximations and reinforce successive approximations to the
target behavior each time it occurs.
5. Reinforce the newly established behavior.
6. Reinforce the old behavior on a variable schedule, and begin reinforcing the new
behavior on an every-time or continuous schedule. The key to successful shaping is
to reinforce closer approximations and not reinforce lesser approximations.

Any behavior that remotely resembles the target behavior should initially be reinforced.
Prompts can be used and then faded. Shaping can be used for all kinds of behavior in the
classroom, including academics. Steps toward successive approximation, however, must be
carefully thought out; otherwise, behaviors that are not working toward the desired goal
may inadvertently be reinforced.

Punishment
Punishment suppresses undesirable behavior but may not necessarily eliminate it (McDaniel,
1980). In some cases, suppression may be of short duration, and when the punishment is
removed, the behavior may reoccur. Punishment can involve presentation of an unpleasant
consequence or the loss of a pleasurable consequence following the occurrence of the
undesirable behavior. Punishment is designed to reduce the probability that the behavior
that precedes it will reoccur. Although punishment is an efficient way of changing behavior,
it can become seductive and reinforcing for classroom teachers and can be overused. The
greatest problem with punishment is that it does not provide an appropriate model of
acceptable behavior. Furthermore, in many classrooms, punishment is accompanied by an
emotional response from the teacher. Although most teachers consider punishment as
involving a reprimand, time-out, or loss of an activity such as recess, in many classrooms,
physical punishment designed to embarrass children into submission is still used, even
though it has a high emotional cost. Shea and Bauer (1987) made a strong case for
minimizing the use of punishment, especially more severe punishment, such as
embarrassment or spanking, because these interventions are likely to erode self-esteem
and further impair an already strained teacher-student relationship. When punishments are
used, these guidelines should be followed:

1. All students are aware of which behaviors are punished and how they are punished.
2. Appropriate models for acceptable behavior are provided.
3. Punishments are offered immediately, consistently, and fairly.
4. Punishments are offered impersonally.
5. A natural or logical consequence should be used as often as possible.
6. The student being punished must understand the relationship between his or her
behavior and the punishment.

Loss of the privilege during which the inappropriate behavior is exhibited is fair. Warning,
nagging, threatening, and debating, however, should be avoided. In other words, act, don't
yak. Punishment can exert a complex, negative effect in the classroom and on teacher-
student relationships. Furthermore, when less punishing interventions are combined with
positive reinforcers, they tend to be effective in the long run. In 1946, Anderson and Brewer
reported that teachers using dominating behaviors of force, threat, shame, and blame had
classrooms in which children displayed nonconforming behavior at rates higher than in
classrooms in which teachers were more positive and supportive. Personal hostility from
teachers and punishments in an atmosphere containing minimal positive reinforcement and
emotional warmth are unproductive. To be effective, punishment must be related in form to
the misbehavior. It must be consistent, fair, and just; must be delivered impersonally; and
must not involve the assignment of extra work that is unrelated to the act for which the
student is being punished. Opportunities must also be offered for the student to exhibit and
receive reinforcement for more appropriate behavior.
Reprimands are the most frequent punishment used by teachers. Contacting parents, losing
privileges, and time-outs come next in frequency. Reprimands include a statement of
appropriate alternative behavior. Students respond well to short reprimands followed by
clear, directed statements. Effective reprimands are specific, do not humiliate the child, are
provided immediately, and are given with a firm voice and controlled physical demeanor.
They are often backed up with a loss of privilege, including a statement encouraging more
appropriate behavior. Attempt to describe the behavior that you observe, rather than how
you feel about the certain behavior. Instead of telling a student that he or she is rude for
interrupting, make a statement such as, "You have interrupted me three times. I will
answer your question as soon as I finish the explanation."' This should be delivered in a
calm way and in a way that does not embarrass the child in the presence of others. Jeremy
had complained to his mother that his teacher was always yelling at him to keep still or be
quiet. Feeling particularly upset one afternoon, Jeremy wrote his fifth-grade teacher the
letter presented in Figure 4.8. Fortunately, after reading this letter, his teacher understood
that yelling was an ineffective way to deal with Jeremy's behavior.

Figure 4.8. Jeremy's Letter

Abramowitz, O'Leary, and Futtersak (1988) compared the effects of short and long
reprimands in an alternating treatment design. Over the course of the study, short
reprimands resulted in significantly lower off-task rates than long reprimands. Prudent
reprimands that are immediate, unemotional, brief, and consistently backed up with
consequences are clearly preferred to lengthy reprimands that are delayed, loud, emotional,
and not matched to consequences. Abramowitz and O'Leary (1991) suggested that
immediate reprimands result in much lower rates of off-task interactions with peers but do
not change rates of off-task behaviors that do not involve peers. The authors hypothesized
that non-interactive, off-task behavior may be an avoidance response to difficult
schoolwork. Interactive, off-task behaviors may be reinforced by peer attention and
modified more effectively by the timing of feedback. Consistent reprimands are clearly
superior to inconsistent reprimands for minimizing calling out and other disruptive behaviors
(Acker & O'Leary, 1988). When misbehaviors followed with reprimands versus ignoring are
evaluated, however, reprimands are not particularly effective in managing off-task behavior.
Reprimanding every incident of off-task behavior did not prove to be any more effective
than reprimanding one quarter of misbehavior incidents. Increasing consistency in these
low-rate situations does not appear to lead to significant differences (Pfiffner, O'Leary,
Rosen, & Sanderson, 1985).
Furthermore, the intensity or aversiveness of the initial delivery of the reprimand may be
critical for children with ADHD (Futtersak, OLeary, & Abramowitz, 1989). In this study,
children were exposed to teachers who delivered either consistently strong reprimands from
the outset with immediate brief and firm close proximity to the child or reprimands that
increased in severity over time. Results supported the hypothesis that gradually
strengthening initially weak reprimands was less effective for suppressing off-task behavior
than the immediate introduction and maintenance of full-strength reprimands. In addition,
reprimands are more effective when delivered with eye contact and in close proximity to the
child (Van Hauten, Nau, MacKenzie-Keating, Sameoto, & Colavecchia, 1982).

Response cost
Response cost is a punishing technique that translates to the equivalent of losing what you
possess or have earned. Earned consequences are considered reinforcers. When they are
lost, this is response cost. The child places in jeopardy what he or she has earned as the
result of inappropriate behavior. In many situations, response cost in the form of a penalty
or fine is combined with positive reinforcement. To be effective, more reinforcers must be
earned than lost. Response cost is often used to reduce off-task behavior and improve
compliance with directions.
Response cost may be the most powerful means of managing consequences for children
with ADHD or other disruptive behavior problems (Rapport, Murphy, & Bailey, 1982). In a
traditional model of response cost, many children with ADHD may immediately go bankrupt.
Alternative systems have included adjusting the ratio of the number of reinforcers provided
for each positive behavior versus those lost for negative behavior as well as increasing the
number of opportunities to exhibit positive behavior and receive reinforcement. In the
former case, six points might be provided for the appropriate behavior but only one point
lost for the negative behavior. In the latter case, increased opportunities are provided,
making it easier for children to earn a greater number of points, thereby decreasing their
chances of going bankrupt when they exhibit negative behavior. A slightly altered form of
response cost has been found to be quite effective with children with ADHD (Rapport,
Murphy, & Bailey, 1982). Under this system, the child is initially provided with a maximum
number of points or tokens to be earned during a school day and must work throughout the
school day to retain those reinforcers. Some impulsive children seem to work harder to keep
their plates full rather than attempt to fill an empty plate. Possibly because they have a long
history of not working well for positive reinforcement, a system in which they are provided
with all of their reinforcement initially and must work to keep, a response cost system may
appear more motivating or attractive to them.
A substantial body of research documents the effectiveness of response cost in the
classroom (Kazdin, 1982). One of the earliest studies (Rapport, Murphy, & Bailey, 1982)
compared response cost and stimulant medication for task-related behavior in a group of
hyperactive boys. The response cost procedure resulted in significant increases in on-task
behavior and academic performance. Stimulant medication was notably less effective.
Pfiffner and colleagues (1985) found that response cost in the form of lost recess was more
effective than reprimands in maintaining on-task behavior. Response cost has also been
compared with reward alone. Both conditions resulted in a twofold increase in academic
output or reduction in inappropriate classroom behavior and a corresponding increase in on-
task behavior. Children often do not show a differential preference for either reward or
response cost procedures (Hundert, 1976; Iwata & Bailey, 1974), but they appear to
maintain treatment gains better during fading and withdrawal of response cost than they do
in response to traditional rewards (Sullivan & O'Leary, 1990).
A response cost system can be as simple as chips in a cup, marks on a chart, or marbles in
a jar. A more complex means of managing response cost includes electronic devices such as
the Attention Training System (Gordon & Davidson, 1981; Rapport, 1987). The Attention
Training System is a remote-controlled counter that sits on the student's desk. This device
provides the student with a digital readout showing the number of points he or she has
earned. Using a remote control device, points can be added or removed from anywhere in
the classroom, contingent on the child's on- and off-task behavior. By not having to move
within physical proximity of the child, the teacher avoids becoming a negative reinforcer
when the child is off task. DuPaul, Guevremont, and Barkley (1992) demonstrated the
efficacy of response cost contingencies for managing classroom behavior and academic
productivity using the Attention Training System. Response cost contingencies led to
marked improvements on task-related attention and a reduction in ADHD symptoms during
work time.
For response cost to be effective, the procedure must be used for most, if not, all, of the
classroom day (Morgan & Jenson, 1988). The number of students in the program must be
manageable, and highly motivating rewards must be provided. If not thought out well and
managed effectively, response cost can backfire and increase classroom problem behaviors
(Burchard & Barrera, 1972).
Response cost can be difficult to implement. Though it may be as simple as chips in a cup
placed on the student's desk, many teachers inadvertently become negative reinforcers
when they approach the child to remove a consequence, thereby building failure into a
potentially useful model. When students who become bankrupt quickly or who are
oppositional from the start are placed in a group contingency situation with built-in failure
(e.g. everyone must earn the reinforcer or no one has access to it), the result is often
greater rather than fewer classroom problems. Morgan and Jenson (1988) suggested the
following guide-lines for using response cost in the classroom:

1. Use the procedure for most, if not all, of the classroom day for the target behavior.
2. Make certain the number of students with whom you are using the program is
manageable.
3. Make certain there are more opportunities for success than for failure.
4. Build in additional incentives, including additional reinforcers that can be earned at
the end of the week, by retaining a minimum number of reinforcers through the
week.
5. Consider incorporating self-monitoring techniques in which students can administer
response cost independently when they recognize a rule violation.

Time-out
Time-out from reinforcement excludes children from the opportunity to participate with
others and receive any kind of positive reinforcement. Time-out is by far the best known
disciplinary technique among teachers. It is also the most likely to be overused and misused
in the classroom. Although a brief time-out of a few minutes duration can exert a positive
influence on classroom behavior when applied appropriately, many teachers apply time-out
ineffectively as often as effectively (Walker & Walker, 1991).
The least restrictive form of time-out consists of removal of certain reinforcing activities or
objects from the misbehaving child for a short period. Time-out, in a restricted environment
outside of the classroom is the most extreme form of this type of discipline. The child
cannot see the classroom nor interact with others.
The effectiveness of time-out is well established; however, additional research is needed to
identify specific situations, parameters, and procedures associated with the success of time-
out for children with ADHD. Clearly, time-out holds a low probability of directly affecting
children's ADHD symptoms for the better. Time-out can be quite effective for noncompliant
children, but for children with ADHD, you must distinguish between noncompliant behaviors
and behaviors resulting from ADHD.
In general, for time-out to be effective:

1. students should be separated from reinforcement,

2. the time should be short,
3. confrontation should be avoided,
4. verbal interaction should be limited, and
5. a time-contingent release should be provided (Bean & Roberts, 1981). Time-
contingent release refers to the amount of time and the contingencies (e.g. sitting
quietly) required to earn release. These contingencies should be explained and
provided to the child prior to entering time-out. Children warned less in time-out also
respond better (Roberts, 1982).

The length of time-out is also critical in determining effectiveness. A 4-minute time-out was
found to be significantly better than a 10-second or 1-minute timeout among a group of
elementary school students (Hobbs, Forehand, & Murray, 1978). Long periods of time-out
constitute seclusion and lose their punishing value. It is also important for the time-out
activity to be less reinforcing than the setting or activity from which the child is being
removed. If a particular activity the child is leaving is non-reinforcing, this child may in fact
learn to misbehave as a means of going to time-out to do something else. Work should not
be missed due to time-out. Time-out should be boring, uninteresting, and something the
child places last on his or her list of chosen school activities. The effectiveness of time-out
depends on a number of factors, including the child, your ability to apply the intervention
consistently, the child's understanding of the intervention, the rules governing the
intervention, characteristics of the time-out area, duration of timeout, and the ability to
evaluate the effectiveness of time-out quickly. If time-out does not work in the first few
interventions, an alternative strategy should be considered. Eight parameters should define
the use of time-out (Scarboro, & Forehand, 1975):

1. A warning that time-out may come should be offered.

2. The child should be consistently removed and placed in time-out when the behavior
reoccurs.
3. A specific location should be defined for time-out.
4. A specific duration for time-out should be set.
5. The consistent schedule for time-out use should be defined.
6. A defined behavior should lead to time-out.
7. Clear contingencies should be defined for the child to be released from time-out.

Time-out can be effective in typical classroom settings because it restores order by

removing the child who is disrupting class, by reducing the opportunity for peer approval
that maintains some children who disrupt, by reducing the opportunity for students to
manipulate situations, and by allowing the student to demonstrate appropriate behavior
before exiting time-out. In elementary classroom settings, time-out should be from 2 to 5
minutes. If a student is not in control, an additional minute should be added. Teachers
should not force resistant students into time-out but should seek help from the principal or
other school personnel. Finally, as soon as possible after time-out is over, something
positive in the student's behavior should be reinforced. Table 4.4 contains a list of dos and
don'ts for time-out. Table 4.5 contains a thorough list of procedures for implementing
seclusionary time-out.
There are many things you can do to minimize the need to use time-out. Make sure that
classroom activities are more reinforcing than time-out. Provide students with ample but not
excessive opportunities to comply. Provide disruptive students with additional positive
consequences for not requiring time-out in a given time span.

Table 4.4. The "Dos and Don'ts" of time-out

Do Don't

Don't start the procedure without explaining

Do explain the total procedure to the child
time-out to the child first in a calm setting that
before starting time-out.
is not emotionally charged.

Don't just pick any place. Make sure it isn't too

Do prepare a time-out setting for the child
dark, too confining, dangerous, or not
that is clean, well-lit, and ventilated.
ventilated.

Do pick a place or situation for time-out that

Don't pick a place that is scary or that could be
is boring or less reinforcing than the
more reinforcing than the classroom.
classroom.

Do use a set of structured verbal requests

Don't threaten the child repeatedly with a time-
with the child, such as the recommended
out.
precision request format.

Do remain calm, and don't talk with the Don't get into a verbal exchange with the child
child when he or she is being taken to time- on the way to time-out or while the child is in
out. time-out.

Do place the child in time-out for a set Don't tell the child to come out of time-out
period that you control. when he or she is "ready to behave."

Do require the child to be quiet for 30 Don't let a child out of time-out when he or she
seconds at the end of the time-out period, is crying, screaming, yelling, or having a
before being let out. tantrum.

Do use a short period of time (e.g. 5-10 Don't use exceedingly long periods.
minutes).

Do require the child to complete the request Don't allow the child to avoid compliance to a
that led to time-out or missed academic request or miss academic work by going to
work. time-out.

From Morgan, D.P., & Jenson, W.R. (1988). Teaching behaviorally disordered students: Preferred
practices (p. 36). New York: Macmillan; reprinted by permission.

Table 4.5. Seclusionary time-out procedures

1. Seclusionary time-out should not be used unless all other procedures have been tried
and failed. This should be a last effort technique.
2. Seclusionary time-out should never be used without a parent's written consent.
3. Seclusionary time-out should be used only if it is listed as an approved and agreed-
on technique in a student's individualized education plan (IEP) by the IEP team. The
student should only be placed in time-out for approved behaviors on the IEP, such as
aggression, severe noncompliance, or destructive tantrum-throwing.
4. Seclusionary time-out is defined as removing a student from a reinforcing classroom
setting to a less reinforcing setting. This setting can be another classroom, a chair or
desk outside the classroom, or a room specifically approved for time-out. If a room is
used for time-out, it should be used only for time-out and no other purpose (e.g.
storage, counseling students, special academic work area).
5. The time-out setting should be well-lit, well-ventilated, non-threatening, and clean.
It must also have an observation window or device.
6. The entire time-out procedure should be explained to the student before it is
implemented, prior to the occurrence of misbehavior that results in its use.
7. If misbehavior occurs, identify it. For example, tell the student in a calm, neutral
manner, "That's fighting; you need to go to the time-out room." Tell the student to
remove his or her jewelry, belt, and shoes. Tell the student to empty his or her
pockets (in order to check for such items as pens, pencils, paper clips, knives, and so
forth). The student's socks should be checked for these types of items also. If the
student does not comply with these requests, call for help and then remove the
items and check the pockets yourself. No other conversation should ensue.
8. When a student is placed in the time-out room, he or she must be constantly
monitored by a staff member. The student must never be left alone.
9. When a student is placed in the time-out room, the following information should be
placed in a time-out log:
o Name of the student
o Date
o Staff member responsible for monitoring student
o Time in and time out
o Target behavior warranting the procedures
10. The student should be placed in the time-out room for a specific period of time. A
recommended formula is 1 minute per year of age (e.g. 10 minutes for a 10-year-old
child).
11. If a student is screaming, throwing a tantrum, or yelling, he or she should be quiet
for 30 consecutive seconds before being released from the time-out room. This 30
seconds does not begin until the original designated time-out period has lapsed.
 12. Communication between the supervising staff member and the student should not
take place when the student is in the time-out room (i.e. do not talk with the
student, threaten the student, or try to counsel the student at this time).
13. Do remain calm while taking a student to the time-out room. Do not argue with,
threaten, or verbally reprimand the student.
14. If a student refuses to go to the time-out room, add on time to the specified time-
out duration (e.g. 1 minute for each refusal, up to 5 minutes).
15. If a student refuses to come out of the time-out room, do not beg or try to remove
the student. Simply wait outside, and sooner or later the student will come out on his
or her own.
16. If the student makes a mess in the time-out room, require him or her to clean it up
before he or she leaves.
17. Once the time-out period has ended, return the student to the ongoing classroom
activity, making sure the student is required to complete the task he or she was
engaged in prior to the time-out period. This ensures that students do not purposely
avoid unpleasant tasks by going to the time-out room.
18. All staff members should be trained, and this training documented, before time-out
procedures are started.
19. To ensure the effectiveness of time-out, the reinforcement rate for appropriate
behaviors in the classroom should meet the recommended rate of three or four
positive responses to each negative response (and never fewer than four positive
responses per contact hour).
20. Data should be collected on target behaviors. If time-out is effective, these behaviors
should decrease shortly after the technique is started. If they do not, check that the
procedure is being used correctly, and the reinforcement rate for appropriate
behavior in the classroom is high enough; consider another technique for possible
use.
21. The use of time-out should not be threatened (e.g. "If you do that again, I will put
you in the time-out room"). Rather, the technique should be combined with a
precision request, such as "I need you to stop kicking your desk." If the student
persists, the time-out procedure should be used, and when the student comes out of
the time-out room, the precision request should be restated ("I need you to stop
kicking your desk").
22. The student should be reinforced for not needing time-out.

From Rhode, G., Jenson, W.R., & Reavis, H.K. (1992). The tough kid book: Practical classroom
management strategies (p. 65). Longmont, CO: Sopris West; Reprinted with permission of Sopris West, Inc

Consequential versus Rule-Governed Behavior Due to their inhibitory problems,

children with ADHD may function quite well under appropriate external or environmental
consequences but struggle to develop the internal self-monitoring skills to govern their own
behavior. This latter issue was referred to by Barkley in 1981 as "problems following rule-
governed behavior." Children with ADHD may acquire behavior at a rate similar to others
but take longer to learn to self-manage that behavior in the absence of external
consequences and cues. Thus, even when appropriate reinforcers are located, the child with
ADHD requires a greater number of successful trials to make the transition to self-
management. In part, this speaks to the difference between behavior modification and
behavior management. Teachers are repeatedly taught that if they provide consequences
appropriately, within a reasonable period of time, children's behavior will change. Success is
usually based on the child's continuing to demonstrate the desired behavior when
consequences are removed. When this model is applied to children with ADHD, many
interventions are often deemed to be failures. For the child with ADHD, demonstrating a
behavior in the presence of consequences is not synonymous with having developed the
self-management skills to use the behavior. Focus on behavior management. That is, the
intervention is deemed successful if the child's behavior is modified in the presence of
consequences. As consequences are removed and the child's behavior regresses, this should
not be interpreted as failure but rather as too quick a change in the schedule of
reinforcement. The child has yet to make the transition from consequentially managed
behavior to rule-governed behavior for that particular task.
Three Keys to Using Punishment Effectively Timing, intensity, and consistency are the
three keys to using punishment effectively and appropriately in the classroom. The
punishing procedures should be initiated as soon as possible after the aversive behavior is
exhibited and should be as closely related to the misbehavior as possible. Furthermore, if
punishments are too mild, they will not be effective and may slowly habituate the child to
tolerate or adapt to more intensive or lengthy punishments. If too intense, however,
punishments are not only abusive but likely create other problems. Be conservative when
using punishing techniques but make certain their intensity is appropriate. To be effective,
punishments must be consistent and predictable. Following punishment, you should return
the child to the situation without expecting overt guilt, making efforts to reassure or
reinforce the child. A consistent schedule of punishments should also be used. A continuous
schedule of punishment for a specific targeted behavior is best. Finally, it is valuable to
attempt to find out what drives the misbehavior and work toward managing the
environment to minimize causative factors. As noted previously in this chapter, children who
are experiencing LD may misbehave out of frustration. This may also be the case for
children who are experiencing anxiety or depression. By identifying the child's goals and
misbehavior, you can present more appropriate opportunities and methods to reach the
child's goals. When used appropriately, punishment can make a positive difference;
however, punishing interventions should always follow efforts at using reinforcing
interventions to model and shape appropriate classroom behavior.

Conclusion
The effective use of behavioral and cognitive strategies in the classroom may appear
daunting even to experienced teachers. However, changing your behavior and strategies is
often the most efficient and effective means of improving all types of classroom behaviors,
both disruptive and non-disruptive. Through practice comes proficiency. The building block
of emotions and behavior likely contains the largest and most diverse set of problems
encountered in the classroom. By first understanding these problems and seeing the world
through the eyes of your students, and, by then developing and using a set of intervention
strategies on a regular basis, problems of emotions and behavior can be effectively
managed and changed in the classroom.