Good Behavior Game improves student writing conventions and writing productivity in one single-case study¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesisr1·q2·i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i1 In one single-case design study of 6 students in grades 1 and 2, Good Behavior Game improved writing conventions (effect size 0.31, improvement index +12, p=0.05) and writing productivity (effect size 0.75, +27, p<0.01). → What Works Clearinghouse 2023
q2 i2 In the same study, total words written improved with an effect size of 0.75 and improvement index of +27, statistically significant at p<0.01. → What Works Clearinghouse 2023 (2)
Evidence¶
What Works Clearinghouse 2023¶
What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2023). Good Behavior Game. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/728
q2 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r1
WWC synthesis of one single-case design study (Fallon et al., 2020) with 6 students in grades 1 and 2 in one northeastern U.S. school; the writing conventions summary reports a statistically significant effect size of 0.31 (improvement index +12, p=0.05), described as "potentially positive effects 0.31 +12 Yes (p=0.05)".
"Summary for writing conventions: potentially positive effects 0.31 +12 Yes (p=0.05)"
What Works Clearinghouse 2023 (2)¶
What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2023). Good Behavior Game. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/728
q2 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r1
The same single-case study (Fallon et al., 2020) measured total words written; the productivity summary reports a statistically significant effect size of 0.75 (improvement index +27, p<0.01), described as "potentially positive effects 0.75 +27 Yes (p<0.01)". Both domains are rated promising evidence (Tier 3) based on this single study.
"Summary for writing productivity: potentially positive effects 0.75 +27 Yes (p<0.01)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Good Behavior Game improves student behavior, with a pooled effect size of 0.91 across 10 studies meeting WWC standards — related
- The Pathway to Academic Success Project has potentially positive effects on writing conventions for English learners in grades 6-12 — related
- Good Behavior Game improves teacher practice related to student behavior, with a pooled effect size of 0.79 across two studies — related
- Good Behavior Game shows uncertain effects on mathematics achievement, with an effect size of 0.26 that is not statistically significant — related
- Good Behavior Game shows uncertain effects on literacy achievement, with a pooled effect size of 0.07 that is not statistically significant — related
- Good Behavior Game shows uncertain effects on school climate in after-school programs, with a pooled effect size of 0.15 that is not statistically significant — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
gbg-improves-writing-outcomes |
title |
Good Behavior Game improves student writing conventions and writing productivity in one single-case study |
description |
Good Behavior Game improves student writing conventions and writing productivity in one single-case study |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — what-works-clearinghouse-2023, what-works-clearinghouse-2023-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.