By
Shivanna N Birbal
Florida International University
This issue ofNASET’s Classroom Management series was written by Shivanna N. Birbal from Florida International University. Students with special needs often face challenges in the areas of academic performance and behavioral self-regulation. These students usually require support and intervention strategies to foster their educational growth and overall well-being. As such, one effective approach is the implementation of token economy systems within educational environments. In this regard, token economy systems provide a structured and incentivized framework which aims to reinforce positive behaviors, promote skill development, as well as enhance academic engagement for students with special needs.
Students with special needs often face challenges in the areas of academic performance and behavioral self-regulation. These students usually require support and intervention strategies to foster their educational growth and overall well-being. As such, one effective approach is the implementation of token economy systems within educational environments. In this regard, token economy systems provide a structured and incentivized framework which aims to reinforce positive behaviors, promote skill development, as well as enhance academic engagement for students with special needs.
The implementation of token economy systems in educational settings has proven effective across varying populations, which consists of students who are diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) as well as other developmental disabilities. Additionally, these systems leverage the principles of behaviorism, as they reinforce positive behaviors through the use of ‘tokens’ which can be exchanged for preferred privileges or items. With respect to examining the impact of the token economy system specifically tailored for students with special needs, the findings of the study can inform educators, special education professionals, as well as policymakers in designing effective strategies to support these students in their academic journeys.
Bippes et al. (1986) introduced a token-based reward system in a jail centre classroom to examine its effects on academic and social behaviour. The study used a pre-test and post-test design, and the subjects were students in the detention facility. Students received tokens during the intervention for exhibiting good academic and social behaviours. The findings showed that the kids’ academic and social behaviours significantly improved as a result of the token system.
As evidenced by the study by Battaglia et al. (2015) provides valuable insights into the use of a class-wide intervention for improving classroom behaviour and academic performance. The “on-task in a box” intervention is particularly noteworthy due to its simplicity and ease of implementation, which makes it feasible for educators to adopt in their classrooms. The findings of the study support the effectiveness of this intervention strategy, as it led to increased on-task behaviour and academic productivity among the students. The use of a multiple baseline design strengthens the internal validity of the study, allowing for a clear demonstration of the intervention’s effects. However, it is important to note that the study was conducted in a single classroom setting with a relatively small sample size, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Further research with larger and more diverse samples would be beneficial to confirm the effectiveness of the “on-task in a box” intervention across different educational settings, (Battaglia et al., 2015).
Similarly, in the study by Lastrapes et al. (2018), the impact of a game-based intervention on teacher praise and student behavior in a classroom setting was examined. The researchers implemented a game where teachers earned points for delivering specific types of praise, and students earned points for positive behaviors. This study employed a multiple baseline design across three classrooms to assess the effects of the intervention. The findings revealed that the game-based approach significantly increased the frequency of teacher praise and positive student behaviors. Moreover, the intervention also resulted in a reduction of disruptive behaviors among the students. The game created a motivating and engaging environment for both teachers and students, encouraging positive interactions and behaviors.
The research highlights the effectiveness of using game-based interventions to promote positive behavior in classrooms. By incorporating elements of competition and rewards, the intervention successfully increased teacher praise and encouraged students to exhibit desirable behaviors. This study provides valuable insights for educators and practitioners seeking innovative and effective strategies to improve classroom dynamics and foster positive student behavior. However, it is important to note that the study was conducted in a specific context with a limited number of classrooms, and further research is needed to generalize these findings to a broader range of educational settings and student populations.
According to Dickerson et al. (2005), a comprehensive review of existing literature on the use of token economy interventions for individuals with schizophrenia was conducted. These authors analyzed various studies that employed token economies, a behavioral intervention system utilizing tokens as rewards for desired behaviors, in the context of schizophrenia treatment. The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of token economies in improving behavioral and clinical outcomes in this population. The findings suggested that token economy interventions have promising results for addressing certain aspects of schizophrenia, particularly in encouraging pro-social behaviors and improving compliance with medication and treatment regimens. Positive outcomes were also observed in promoting activities of daily living and enhancing overall functional abilities in individuals with schizophrenia. However, the researchers also acknowledged the limitations of the existing studies, including small sample sizes, methodological issues, and a lack of long-term follow-up.
Based on their analysis, the authors offered recommendations for future research in this area. They emphasized the need for more extensive and methodologically rigorous studies to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of token economies on schizophrenia treatment outcomes. Additionally, the researchers suggested investigating the potential of incorporating cognitive and social cognitive training into token economy interventions to address cognitive impairments commonly associated with schizophrenia.
The study conducted by Carlson et al. (2000) investigated the impact of reward and response cost on the performance and motivation of children diagnosed with ADHD. The researchers aimed to explore the effectiveness of these behavioral interventions in improving the academic and behavioral outcomes of children with ADHD. To conduct the study, participants were recruited from a clinical setting, and a total of 24 children aged 6 to 12 years, diagnosed with ADHD, were selected. The study implemented a carefully designed token system to assess the effects of reward and response cost. During the baseline phase, the children engaged in tasks without any intervention. In the subsequent phases, the participants were exposed to either a reward condition, where they received tokens for completing tasks successfully, or a response cost condition, where they had to return tokens for negative behaviors or incomplete tasks. The results were analyzed through a series of repeated measures, focusing on task completion rates and the number of tokens earned or lost.
The findings of the study demonstrated that both the reward and response cost interventions had significant effects on the behavior and motivation of children with ADHD. The reward system led to a marked improvement in task completion rates, indicating that the incentive of earning tokens positively influenced their performance. Conversely, the response cost condition resulted in a reduction of negative behaviors, as the children became more cautious about preserving their tokens. These results suggest that both reward and response cost interventions can be effective behavior management strategies for children with ADHD, enhancing their task engagement and reducing disruptive behaviors.
The study contributes valuable insights into the management of ADHD symptoms in an academic context. By implementing a token-based intervention, educators and clinicians can effectively motivate and guide children with ADHD to improve their academic performance and enhance their self-regulation skills. The research also underscores the importance of employing individualized behavioral strategies to address the unique challenges faced by children with ADHD, ultimately fostering a more positive and conducive learning environment for these students. However, it is essential to acknowledge the study’s limitations, such as its small sample size and short duration, and further research is warranted to validate and generalize these findings to a broader population of children with ADHD.
The implementation of token economy systems is not without potential biases and ethical considerations. One possible bias could stem from the subjective allocation of tokens which may influenced the lived experiences of individual participants. Ethically, it is imperative to ensure that the tokens offered would align with the well-being of participants which, in turn, would avoid any undue influence. Furthermore, the practicality of maintaining equity in the token allocation process must be comprehensively evaluated to sustain the validity of the proposed intervention (Doll, 2013; Kazin, 1982). In addition, considerations should be made regarding the long-term sustainability of such token systems and whether these interventions reflect internal behavioral change or merely temporary compliance due to external incentives.
In conclusion, token economy systems have demonstrated both efficiency and effectiveness in promoting positive behaviors and academic outcomes among different groups including those with conditions like ASD, ADHD and other developmental vulnerabilities (Doll, 2013). These systems could enhance engagement, foster pro-social behaviors, and support overall well-being by using tokens as rewards. However, it is important to note existing limitations in the reviewed studies, such as small sample sizes and restricted generalizability, which would require further research. Future exploration may focus on a more extensive and methodologically rigorous research studies towards the implementation of token economy systems across diverse educational settings.
References
Alter P. (2012). Helping students with emotional and behavioral disorders solve mathematics word problems. Preventing School Failure Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 56(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2011.565283
American Psychological Association, Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures. (1993). A report adopted by the division 12 board. http://www.div12.org/sites/default/files/InitialReportOfTheChamblessTaskForce.pdf
Battaglia A. A., Radley K. C., & Ness E. J. (2015). Evaluating the effects of on-task in a box as a class-wide intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 52(8), 743-755. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21858
Bippes R., McLaughlin T. F., & Williams R. L. (1986). A classroom token system in a detention center: Effects for academic and social behavior. Techniques, 2(2), 126–132.
Carlson C. L., Mann M., & Alexander D. K. (2000). Effects of reward and response cost on the performance and motivation of children with ADHD. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005455009154
Carnett A., Raulston T., Lang R., Tostanoski A., Lee A., Sigafoos J., & Machalicek W. (2014). Effects of a perseverative interest-based token economy on challenging and on-task behavior in a child with autism. Journal of Behavioral Education, 23(3), 368–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-014-9195-7
Dickerson F. B., Tenhula W. N., & Green-Paden L. D. (2005). The token economy for schizophrenia: Review of the literature and recommendations for future research. Schizophrenia Research, 75(2–3), 405–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2004.08.026
Doll C., McLaughlin T. F., & Barretto A. (2013). The token economy: A recent review and evaluation. International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, 2(1), 131–149.
Frank-Crawford M. A., Borrero J. C., Newcomb E. T., Chen T., & Schmidt J. D. (2019). Preference for and efficacy of accumulated and distributed response–reinforcer arrangements during skill acquisition. Journal of Behavioral Education, 28(2), 227–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-09312-7
Hackenberg, T. D. (2009). Token reinforcement: A review and analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 91(2), 257–286. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-257
Kazdin A. E. (1982). The token economy: A decade later. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15(3), 431–445. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1982.15-431
Lastrapes R. E., Fritz J. N., Casper-Teague L. (2018). Effects of the teacher versus students game on teacher praise and student behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 27, 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-9306-y
To Access this Article
To download a PDF file version of this issue of NASET’s Classroom Management Series: Click here
