Enhancing academic engagement: Providing opportunities for responding and influencing students to choose to respond

Psychology in the Schools

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 389-403

  Skinner, Christopher H ^a,b   Pappas, Danielle N ^a   Davis, Kai A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85032070068     PISSN: 00333085     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20065     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Berliner, D.C. (1984). The half-full glass: A review of research on teaching. In P.L. Hosford (Ed.), Using what we know about teaching (pp. 51-85). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
2. Billington, E.J., & Ditommaso, N.M. (2003). Demonstrations and applications of the matching law in education. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 91-104.
3. Billington, E.J., & Skinner, C.H. (2002). Getting students to choose to do more work: Evidence of the effectiveness of the interspersal procedure. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 105-116.
4. Billington, E.J., Skinner, C.H., & Cruchon, N.M. (2004). Improving sixth-grade students' perceptions of high-effort assignments by assigning more work: Interaction of additive interspersal and assignment effort on assignment choice. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 477-490.
5. Billington, E.J., Skinner, C.H., Hutchins, H., & Malone, J.C. (2004). Varying problem effort and choice: Using the interspersal technique to influence choice towards more effortful assignments. Journal of Behavioral Education, 13, 193-207.
6. Cates, G.L., & Skinner, C.H. (2000). Getting remedial mathematics students to prefer homework with 40% more problems? An investigation of the strength of the interspersal procedure. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 339-347.
7. Cooke, N.L., Guzaukas, R., Presley, L.S., & Kerr, K. (1994). Effects of using a ratio of new items to review items during drill and practice: Three experiments. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 213-234.
8. Daly, E.J., Chafouleas, S., & Skinner, C.H. (2005). Interventions for reading problems: Designing and evaluating effective strategies. New York: Guilford Press.
9. Derr, T.F., & Shapiro, E.S. (1989). A behavioral evaluation of curriculum-based assessment of reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 7, 148-160.
10. Derr-Minneci, T.F., & Shapiro, E.S. (1992). Validating curriculum-based measurement in reading from a behavioral perspective. School Psychology Quarterly, 7, 2-16.
11. Dunlap, G., DePerzcel, M., Clark, S., Wilson, D., Wright, S., & Gomez, A. (1994). Choice making to promote adaptive behavior for students with emotional and behavioral challenges. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 505-518.
12. Dunlap, G., & Kern, L. (1996). Modifying instructional activities to promote desirable behavior: A conceptual and practical framework. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 297-312.
13. Evans, T., Skinner, C.H., Henington, C., Sims, S., & McDaniel, E.C. (2002). Conspicuous and covert timing during CBM of mathematics across African-American and Caucasian students: An investigation of situational bias. School Psychology Review, 31, 529-539.
14. Gravios, T.A., & Gickling, E.E. (2002). Best practices in curriculum-based assessment. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV: Vol. 1 (pp. 885-898). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
15. Greenwood, C.R., Delquadri, J.C., & Carta, J.J. (1997). Together we can! Class-wide peer tutoring to improve basic academic skills. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
16. Greenwood, C.R., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R.V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In W. Heward, T. Heron, D. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education (pp. 58-88). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
17. Gresham, P.M., Watson, T.S., & Skinner, C.H. (2001). Functional behavioral assessment: Principles, procedures, and future direction. School Psychology Review, 30, 156-172.
18. Grskovic, J.A., & Belfiore, P.J. (1996). Improving the spelling performance of students with disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6, 343-354.
19. Haring, N.G., & Eaton, M.D. (1978). Systematic instructional procedures: An instructional hierarchy. In N.G. Haring, T.C. Lovitt, M.D. Eaton, & C.L. Hansen (Eds.), The fourth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23-40). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
20. Henington, C., & Skinner, C.H. (1998). Peer monitoring. In K. Toppins & S. Ely (Eds.), Peer assisted learning (pp. 237-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Hermstein, R.J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267-272.
22. Heward, W.L., & Gardner, R., III. (1996). Everyone participates in this class: Using response cards to increase active student response. Teaching Exceptional Children, 28, 4-10.
23. Joseph, L.M. (2002). Best practices in planning interventions for students with reading problems. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV: Vol. 1 (pp. 803-816). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
24. Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
25. Mace, P.C., McCurdy, B., & Quigley, E.A. (1990). The collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 197-205.
26. MacQuarrie, L.L., Tucker, J.A., Burns, M.K., & Hartman, B. (2002). Comparison of retention rates using traditional, drill sandwich, and incremental rehearsal flash card methods. School Psychology Review, 31, 584-595.
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, 25, 55-70.
28. Martens, B.K., Halperin, S., Rummel, J.E., & Kilpatrick, D. (1990). Matching theory applied to contingent teacher attention. Behavioral Assessment, 12, 139-155.
29. Martens, B.K., & Houk, J.L. (1989). The application of Herrnstein's law of effect to disruptive and on-task behavior of a retarded adolescent girl. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 51, 17-27.
30. Martens, B.K., Lochner, D.G., & Kelly, S.Q. (1992). The effects of variable-interval reinforcement on academic engagement: A demonstration of matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 143-151.
31. McCurdy, M., Skinner, C.H., Grantham, K., Watson, T.S., & Hindman, P.M. (2001). Increasing on-task behavior in an elementary student during mathematics seat-work by interspersing additional brief problem. School Psychology Review, 30, 23-32.
32. Meadows, S., & Skinner, C.H. (2002, May). Interspersing additional brief English tasks: Enhancing the educational validity of the interspersal procedure. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Applied Behavior Analysis, Toronto.
33. Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1984). Practical implications of the matching law. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 367-380.
34. Neef, N.A., Mace, F.C., & Shade, D. (1993). Impulsivity in students with serious emotional disturbance: The interactive effects of reinforcer rate, delay, and quality. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 37-52.
35. Neef, N.A., Mace, P.C., Shea, M.C., & Shade, D. (1992). Effects of reinforcer rate and reinforcer quality on time allocation: Extensions of matching theory to educational settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 691-699.
36. Neef, N.A., Shade, D., & Miller, M.S. (1994). Assessing influential dimensions of reinforcers on choice in students with serious emotional disturbance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 575-583.
37. O'Leary, K.D., Poulos, R.W., & Devine, V.T. (1972). Tangible reinforcers: Bonuses or bribes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 38, 1-8.
38. Popkin, J., & Skinner, C.H. (2003). Enhancing academic performance in a classroom serving students with serious emotional disturbance: Interdependent group contingencies with randomly selected components. School Psychology Review, 32, 271-284.
39. Premack, D. (1965). Reinforcement theory. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 13, pp. 123-180). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
40. Rhymer, K.N., Henington, C., Skinner, C.H., & Looby, E.J. (1999). The effects of explicit timing on mathematics performance in second-grade Caucasian and African-American students. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 397-407.
41. Rhymer, K.N., Skinner, C.H., Henington, C., D'Reaux, R.A., & Sims, S. (1998). Effects of explicit timing on mathematics problem completion rates in African-American third-grade elementary children. Journal of Behavioral Analysis, 31, 673-677.
42. Riley, J.P. (1986). The effects of teachers' wait-time and knowledge comprehension questions on science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 335-342.
43. Roberts, M.L., Turco, T.L., & Shapiro, E.S. (1991). Differential effects of fixed instructional ratios on students' progress in reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9, 308-318.
44. Romeo, F.F. (1998). The negative effects of using a group contingency system of classroom management. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25, 130-134.
45. Rowe, M. (1974). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control. Part 1: Wait-time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 469-475.
46. Scon, T.M., Liaupsin, C., Nelson, C.M., & McIntyre, J. (in press). Alton school district team-based functional behavior assessment as a proactive public school process: A descriptive analysis of current barriers. Journal of Behavioral Education.
47. Shapiro, E.S. (1996). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
48. Sharp, S., & Skinner, C.H. (in press). Using interdependent group contingencies with randomly selected criteria and paired reading to enhance class-wide reading performance. Journal of Applied School Psychology.
49. Shinn, M.R. (2002). Best practices in using curriculum-based measurement in a problem-solving model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV: Vol. 1 (pp. 671-698). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
50. Skinner, B.F. (1956). A case history in scientific method. American Psychologist, 11, 221-233.
51. Skinner, C.H. (2002). An empirical analysis of interspersal research: Evidence, implications and applications of the discrete task completion hypothesis. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 347-368.
52. Skinner, C.H. (2004). Academic engagement. In A. Canter (Ed.), Helping children at home and school-II: Handouts from your school psychologist (pp. S3-1-S3-4) Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
53. Skinner, C.H., Bamberg, H., Smith, E.S., & Powell, S. (1993). Subvocal responding to increase division fact fluency. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 49-56.
54. Skinner, C.H., Belfiore, P.J., Mace, H.W., Williams, S., & Johns, G.A. (1997). Altering response topography to increase response efficiency and learning rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 54-64.
55. Skinner, C.H., Belfiore, P.B., & Watson, T.S. (1995/2002). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 345-356.15. [Reprinted from Assessment in Rehabilitation and Exceptionality, 2, 207-220.]
56. Skinner, C.H., Belfiore, P.B., & Watson, T.S. (1995/2002). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 345-356.15. [Reprinted from Assessment in Rehabilitation and Exceptionality, 2, 207-220.]
57. Skinner, C.H., Cashwell, C., & Dunn, M. (1996). Independent and interdependent group contingencies: Smoothing the rough waters. Special Services in the Schools, 12, 61-78.
58. Skinner, C.H., Dittmer, K., & Howell, L. (2000). Direct observation in school settings: Theoretical issues. In E.S. Shapiro & T.R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Behavioral assessment in the schools: Theory, research and clinical foundations (pp. 19-45). New York: Guilford Press.
59. Skinner, C.H., Fletcher, P.A., & Henington, C. (1996). Increasing learning trial rates by increasing student response rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 313-325.
60. Skinner, C.H., Hurst, K.L., Teeple, D.F., & Meadows, S.O. (2002). Increasing on-task behavior during mathematics independent seat-work in students with emotional disorders by interspersing additional brief problems. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 647-659.
61. Skinner, C.H., Shapiro, E.S., Turco, T.L., Cole, C.L., & Brown, D.K. (1992). A comparison of self- and peer-delivered immediate corrective feedback on multiplication performance. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 101-116.
62. Skinner, C.H., Skinner, A.L., & Sterling-Turner, H.E. (2002). Best practices in utilizing group contingencies for intervention and prevention. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best Practices in School Psychology (4th ed., pp. 817-830). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
63. Skinner, C.H., & Smith, E.S. (1992). Issues surrounding the use of self-managed interventions for increasing academic performance. School Psychology Review, 21, 202-210.
64. Skinner, C.H., Wallace, M.A., & Neddenriep, C.E. (2002). Academic remediation: Educational application of research on assignment preference and choice. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 51-65.
65. Skinner, C.H., Waterson, H.J., Bryant, D.R., Bryant, R.J., Collins, P.M., Hill, C.J., et al. (2002). Team problem solving based on research, functional behavioral assessment data, teacher acceptability, and Jim Carey's interview. Proven Practices: Prevention & Remediation Solutions for Schools, 4, 56-64.
66. Skinner, C.H., Williams, R.L., & Neddenriep, C.E. (2004). Using interdependent group-oriented reinforcement to enhance academic performance in general education classrooms. School Psychology Review, 33, 384-397.
67. Slavin, R.E. (1991). Cooperative learning and group contingencies. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1, 105-116.
68. Timberlake, W., & Farmer-Dougan, V.A. (1991). Reinforcement in applied settings: Figuring out ahead of time what will work. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 379-391.
69. Turco, T.L., Elliott, S.N., & Witt, J.C. (1985). Children's involvement in treatment selection: A review of theory and analogue research on treatment acceptability. Programming for Adolescents with Behavioral Disorders, 2, 54-62.
70. Van Houten, R., & Little, G. (1982). Increased response rate in special education children following an abrupt reduction in time limit. Education and Treatment of Children, 5, 23-32.
71. Van Houten, R., Morrison, E., Jarvis, R., & McDonald, M. (1974). The effects of explicitly timing and feedback on compositional response rate in elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 547-555.
72. Van Houten, R., & Thompson, C. (1976). The effects of explicit timing on math performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 227-230.
73. Wallace, M.A., Cox, E.A., & Skinner, C.H. (2003). Increasing independent seat-work: Breaking large assignments into smaller assignments and teaching a student with retardation to recruit reinforcement. School Psychology Review, 23, 132-142.
74. Winterling, V., Dunlap, G., & O'Neill, R.E. (1987). The influence of task variation on the aberrant behaviors of autistic students. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 105-119.
75. Wise Berninger, V. (2002). Best practices in reading, writing, and math assessment-intervention links: A systems approach for schools, classrooms, and individuals. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV: Vol. 1 (pp. 851-866). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.