Effects of Response Cards on Fourth-Grade Students’ Participation and Disruptive Behavior During Language Arts Lessons in an Inclusive Elementary Classroom

  • Crystalyn I. GoodnightEmail author
  • Katelyn G. Whitley
  • Alicia A. Brophy-Dick
Original Paper


Many teachers state that disruptive behavior in their classroom is one of their main challenges, and it often results in a loss of instructional time. Teachers also have difficulty in providing opportunities for their students to be actively engaged in their own learning. This study used an ABAB reversal design to investigate the effects of preprinted response cards on students’ participation and disruptive behavior in a fourth-grade inclusive elementary classroom during language arts instruction. The findings of this study showed that the use of preprinted response cards resulted in increased participation for all five target students. Limitations of the study, areas for future research to investigate, and implications for practice are discussed.


Elementary Response cards Participation Disruptive behavior Language arts instruction 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Student participants completed assent forms in class with teacher assistance in reading through the form, in addition to providing clarification as needed. Because participants were minors, parental consent for each participant was also obtained. Pseudonyms were used throughout the manuscript to protect the identity of individual participants included in the study.


  1. Ares, N., & Gorrell, J. (2002). Middle school students’ understanding of meaningful learning and engaging classroom activities. Journal of Research in Childhood Education,16, 263–277. Scholar
  2. Armendariz, F., & Umbreit, J. (1999). Using active responding to reduce disruptive behavior in a general education classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,1, 152–158. Scholar
  3. Beaman, R., Wheldall, K., & Kemp, C. (2007). Recent research on troublesome classroom behaviour: A review. Australasian Journal of Special Education,31, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brophy, J. H., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research in teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Christle, C. A., & Schuster, J. W. (2003). The effects of using response cards on student participation, academic achievement, and on-task behavior during whole-class, math instruction. Journal of Behavioral Education,12, 147–165. Scholar
  6. Clarke, L. S., Haydon, T., Bauer, A., & Epperly, A. C. (2016). Inclusion of students with an intellectual disability in the general education classroom with the use of response cards. Preventing School Failure,60, 35–42. Scholar
  7. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
  8. Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). Pub. L. No. 114-95, Stat. 1177.Google Scholar
  9. Gage, N. A., Scott, T., Hirn, R., & MacSuga-Gage, A. S. (2018). The relationship between teachers’ implementation of classroom management practices and student behavior in elementary school. Behavioral Disorders,43, 302–315. Scholar
  10. Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, D. S. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 58–88). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.Google Scholar
  11. Heward, W. L. (1994). Three “low tech” strategies for increasing the frequency of active student response during group instruction. In R. Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, & T. E. Heron (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 283–320). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  12. Hutchings, J., Martin-Forbes, P., Daley, D., & Williams, M. E. (2013). A randomized controlled trial of the impact of a teacher classroom management program on the classroom behavior of children with and without behavior problems. Journal of School Psychology,51, 571–585. Scholar
  13. Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal,38, 499–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lambert, M. C., Cartledge, G., Heward, W. L., & Lo, Y. (2006). Effects of response cards on disruptive behavior and academic responding during math lessons by fourth-grade urban students. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,8, 88–99. Scholar
  15. MacSuga-Gage, A. S., & Simonsen, B. (2015). Examining the effects of teacher-directed opportunities to respond on student outcomes: A systematic review of the literature. Education and Treatment of Children,38, 211–239. Scholar
  16. Munro, D. W., & Stephenson, J. (2009). The effects of response cards on student and teacher behavior during vocabulary instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,42, 795–800. Scholar
  17. Randolph, J. (2007). Meta-analysis of the research on response cards: Effects on test achievement, quiz achievement, participation, and off-task behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,9, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schnorr, C. I., Freeman-Green, S., & Test, D. W. (2016). Response cards as a strategy for increasing opportunities to respond: An examination of the evidence. Remedial and Special Education,37, 41–54. Scholar
  19. Sutherland, K. S., Lewis-Palmer, T., Stichter, J., & Morgan, P. L. (2008). Examining the influence of teacher behavior and classroom context on the behavioral and academic outcomes for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. The Journal of Special Education,41, 223–233. Scholar
  20. Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). Exploring the relationship between opportunities to respond to academic requests and the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with EBD. Remedial and Special Education,22, 113–121. Scholar
  21. Tillery, A. D., Varjas, K., Meyers, J., & Collins, A. S. (2010). General education teachers’ perceptions of behavior management and intervention strategies. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,12, 86–102. Scholar
  22. Twyman, J. S., & Heward, W. L. (2015). How to improve student learning in every classroom now. International Journal of Educational Research,87, 78–90. Scholar
  23. Westling, D. L. (2010). Teachers and challenging behavior: Knowledge, views, and practices. Remedial and Special Education,31, 48–63. Scholar
  24. Wood, C. L., Mabry, L. E., Kretlow, A. G., Lo, Y., & Galloway, T. W. (2009). Effects of preprinted response cards on students’ participation and off-task behavior in a rural kindergarten classroom. Rural Special Education Quarterly,28, 39–47. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Early Childhood, Elementary, Middle, Literacy and Special EducationUniversity of North Carolina WilmingtonWilmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations