Pedagogical behaviour modification

1. Introduction

Version followed: there is no single manual or founder. This guide follows the German-language classroom behaviour-modification tradition (from the 1970s onward). It is built from: MacMillan's teacher primer (German translation 1975); Eisert & Barkey (1979), known by title only; the structure of Goetze (2010, ch. 3); a German school handbook (title [uncertain]); and the cooperative variant of Redlich & Schley (Kooperative Verhaltensmodifikation, 1982; reworked as the "Kooperative Methode", Redlich 2000). Classroom procedures are filled in from the primary studies those texts rely on: Madsen et al. 1968, Thomas et al. 1968, Barrish et al. 1969 and Binder et al. 1977. Where these strands differ, the strand is named. [source: Examensarbeit 2016 table of contents; KIT catalogue records; Goetze 2010 Leseprobe; Redlich 2000] [uncertain: the term "pädagogische Verhaltensmodifikation" names a field, not a branded method; no single primary text uses it as a title]

What it is. It is a framework, not a single therapy. Teachers, sometimes advised by a school psychologist or therapist, apply learning-theory principles in ordinary lessons. They build wanted pupil behaviour (attention, work behaviour, rule-following) and reduce disruptive behaviour. They do this by systematically changing what comes before the behaviour (rules, seating, tasks) and what follows it (attention, praise, tokens, privileges, loss of privileges). Later versions add cognitive methods (self-observation, self-instruction, self-reinforcement), modelling and situational or cooperative elements. [source: Examensarbeit 2016, chs. 4, 5 and 7; Goetze 2010 table of contents]

How change happens. Classroom behaviour is learned, and it is kept going by its consequences in the classroom. Teacher attention is the most powerful of these and is often given by mistake to disruption. Changing the contingencies, especially giving contingent approval for appropriate behaviour, changes the behaviour (Madsen et al. 1968; Thomas et al. 1968). Lasting change needs control to move from the teacher to the pupil (self-control; Binder et al. 1977). It also needs the whole class system, teacher included, to change together (Redlich 2000). [source: Madsen et al. 1968 and Thomas et al. 1968 summaries; Binder et al. 1977; Redlich 2000]

Your role as a psychotherapist. Teachers deliver this approach. A clinician usually acts as a consultant: you do the analysis with the teacher, design the plan, coach delivery and read the data. You may also run the cooperative (KVM) process with a class. Section 4 is written so that you can coach a teacher through each step. [synthesis]

2. Framework

Classic operant sequence (single pupil or class) [source: Goetze 2010 ch. 3 structure (diagnostics, then increasing wanted behaviour, then further methods, then school implementation); handbook TOC 795832 (measurement chapter); Binder et al. 1977 phase sequence; step criteria marked synthesis]

Phase	Goal	Typical format and length	Move on when
1. Problem definition	Turn "he is disruptive" into 1–3 observable target behaviours and a positive replacement behaviour	One 30–60 min teacher consultation	Two observers would count the same events from the definition [synthesis]
2. Baseline (Grundrate)	Measure how often the behaviour occurs now, and record the teacher's own approval and disapproval	Observation in the problem lessons, typically 1–2 weeks [synthesis on length]	Data are stable or clearly trending, with at least about 5 data points [synthesis]
3. Functional analysis	Identify antecedents, consequences and maintaining factors (SORKC) and the reinforcers that work for this pupil	Consultation plus reinforcer sampling	A hypothesis about function guides the plan [synthesis]
4. Plan and goal	Choose methods (build first, reduce second), set a criterion, decide who does what, and get consent where needed	Consultation; with pupil or class participation in contract and KVM variants	Teacher can describe exactly what to do when the behaviour does and does not occur [synthesis]
5. Intervention (external control)	Run the contingencies consistently	Daily, in lessons; studies ran several weeks	Criterion met over a set period, e.g. 1–2 weeks [synthesis]
6. Transfer to self-control and fading	Thin schedules, move from tokens to praise and natural rewards, add self-monitoring and self-evaluation	Weeks	Behaviour holds when contingencies are reduced [source: Binder et al. 1977]
7. Evaluation and follow-up	Compare with baseline; optionally a brief return to baseline conditions to test whether the plan caused the change; check again months later	Graph review; follow-up after about 4 months in Binder et al.	Maintenance confirmed, or the plan is revised

Cooperative variant: Kooperative Verhaltensmodifikation / Kooperative Methode (Redlich & Schley; Redlich 2000) [source: Redlich 2000; Fitzner & Thomas 2006 use a three-phase version: cooperative diagnosis, planning, intervention]

Erkundung (exploration). The teacher states their view of the problem and their own reactions. Every pupil's view is gathered (cards, questionnaire, class talk). Goal: a shared picture of the situation, not harmony.
Planung (planning). Ideas are collected, then a binding agreement sets complementary rules for both teacher and pupils.
Veränderung (change). A trial phase with correction, then systematic training in normal lessons, typically about 20 lessons over 4–6 weeks, sometimes longer. Aids are dropped once they are not needed.
Abschluss (closure). Review what worked, then decide what to continue or whether to start a new project.

Move from exploration to planning once the class has one jointly described problem. Move from trial to training once the agreement has been corrected and is accepted. [source: Redlich 2000; transition criteria partly synthesis]

Group game format: the Good Behavior Game / KlasseKinderSpiel runs for 10–20 minutes, once a day, during the lesson phases that are most problematic. [source: Hagen et al. 2023]

3. Guiding principles

[source: as tagged per line]

Behaviour is learned and can be relearned. Look for what teaches and maintains the behaviour in the classroom rather than for a trait. [Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 4]
Diagnose before you intervene. Plan from a functional analysis (SORKC), not from a recipe. [Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 6; Goetze 2010 ch. 3.2.1]
Define observable behaviour. Every target is something you can see and count, and is phrased as what the pupil should do. [handbook TOC 795832, ch. 3; Hagen et al. 2023 rule wording]
Decide from data. Measure the baseline, graph it and judge the plan by the graph, not by impressions. [handbook TOC 795832, ch. 3; Binder et al. 1977]
Build before you reduce; approval is the key lever. Rules alone do little. Approval of appropriate behaviour combined with ignoring minor misbehaviour works. [Madsen et al. 1968]
The teacher's behaviour is part of the problem and the solution. Extra disapproval can increase disruption, and withdrawing approval increases it. Measure the teacher as well as the child. [Thomas et al. 1968; Redlich 2000]
Contingency and immediacy. Consequences follow the target behaviour, quickly and predictably. [Udel contingency-contract guide; Kiese-Himmel 2010]
Consistency. Everyone applies the same plan every time, especially during extinction. [Udel guide; synthesis]
Small steps. Set the first goals low enough to be reached easily and reward approximations. [Redlich 2000; Udel guide; Kiese-Himmel 2010 on shaping]
Individualise. Find out what reinforces this pupil, and match tasks to the pupil's level. [Binder et al. 1977; Kiese-Himmel 2010]
From external control to self-control. Plan from the start how the pupil will take over monitoring, evaluating and reinforcing their own behaviour. [Binder et al. 1977; Fitzner & Thomas 2006, citing Kanfer]
Plan for generalisation and maintenance. Gains made under contingencies can vanish when the contingencies end unless transfer is built in. [Binder et al. 1977, citing Walker et al. 1975]
Transparency and participation. Pupils know the rules, the reasons and the consequences, and help make them. [Redlich 2000; Udel guide]
Understanding before solutions (Lösungsaufschub). Take time to agree on the problem before fixing it. [Redlich 2000]
No winners or losers. Use a jointly designed plan with obligations on both sides instead of a power struggle. [Redlich 2000]
Target habits in the group, not personality. [Redlich 2000]
Expect setbacks; correct, don't control. Mistakes are revision points, not grounds to go back to threats. [Redlich 2000]
Ethical defensibility. Interventions must be justifiable to pupil, parents and school. Answer the classic objections (bribery, manipulation, coldness, suppressing creativity) in planning, not after the fact. [Examensarbeit 2016 conclusion; handbook TOC 795832, ch. 5]
Methods are not recipes; the relationship carries them. [Goetze 2010 introduction]
Fit the child's developmental level. Cognitive, moral and personality development set what a child can understand and self-manage. [Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 5.5]
Least intrusive first. Use antecedent changes and positive methods before response cost, and those before time-out. [synthesis]

4. Intervention inventory

The groupings follow the tradition's own split: assessment, building behaviour, reducing behaviour, derived and self-control procedures, cognitive and modelling additions, then cooperative procedures. [source: handbook TOC 795832, chs. 1–3; Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 7; Goetze 2010 ch. 3] Steps are written in this guide's own words. Example language is illustrative unless quoted.

A. Assessment

4.1 Behaviour definition (Verhaltensdefinition)

Purpose: Turn complaints into countable target behaviours and name a positive alternative. This is always the first step. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 3]
Steps: (1) Ask the teacher for the three situations that bother them most. (2) For each, ask "What would I see on video?" (3) Write a definition with a clear start and end and an example and non-example: for instance, "out of seat = buttocks off chair without permission". (4) Write the replacement behaviour as a positive, for instance "stays seated and raises hand". (5) Pick no more than 1–3 targets. [steps: synthesis consistent with the sources]
Example language (illustrative): "When you say he 'never works', what exactly is he doing in the first ten minutes of maths?"
Watch for: words like "aggressive", "lazy" or "ADHD" left in the definition; targets that are only dead-man goals ("not shouting") with no positive behaviour named [synthesis]. Working when: teacher and observer counts agree.

4.2 Systematic observation and baseline (Grundrate)

Purpose: Measure the current level of the target and of the teacher's reactions before changing anything, so that effects can be judged. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 3 (measurement, continuous measurement, reliability, graphing); Binder et al. 1977; Madsen et al. 1968]
Steps: (1) Choose a method. Event tally (Strichliste) suits discrete acts such as calling out. Interval recording suits ongoing states such as on-task behaviour: in each short interval, note whether the behaviour occurred. (2) Observe in the problem lessons at the same times each day. (3) Record the teacher's approval, disapproval and ignoring as well, as Binder et al. and Madsen et al. did. (4) Where possible, have a second observer score some sessions and calculate agreement; Binder et al. trained observers to above 85%. (5) Plot the data daily on a simple graph. [source: Binder et al. 1977; Madsen et al. 1968; steps 1, 2 and 5 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "For the next week, change nothing. Just tally each call-out on this card and mark every time you comment on it."
Watch for: the teacher starting to intervene during baseline; observer drift; the reactivity of being observed. Working when: the baseline is stable enough that a change would be visible. [synthesis]

4.3 Functional behaviour analysis (SORKC)

Purpose: Identify what triggers and maintains the behaviour, so that the consequence you change is the one that actually maintains it. [source: Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 6; Goetze 2010 ch. 3.2.1]
Steps: For several observed episodes, fill in: S = situation or stimulus (subject, task difficulty, transition, seating, peer); O = organism or person variables (developmental level, learning difficulties, fatigue, medical issues); R = the response, as defined; K = contingency (how regularly the consequence follows); C = consequence (teacher attention, peer laughter, escape from a task, loss of something). Then state a hypothesis: "In [S], [R] is followed by [C], which probably maintains it because ...". Derive the plan from it. For example, attention-maintained behaviour suggests attention for the alternative plus ignoring; escape-maintained behaviour suggests task adaptation, not time-out. [SORKC categories: standard Kanfer scheme as used in the Examensarbeit; the function-to-plan mapping is synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "What happens in the ten seconds after she throws the pencil? Who looks, who laughs, what stops?"
Watch for: time-out used on escape-maintained behaviour, which rewards it [synthesis]. Working when: the hypothesis predicts when the behaviour will occur.

4.4 Reinforcer identification and sampling (Ausprobieren von Verstärkern)

Purpose: Find consequences that actually strengthen this pupil's behaviour. What adults think is rewarding often is not. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2; Binder et al. 1977; Udel guide]
Steps: (1) Ask the pupil, for example "What would you like to earn?", and observe what they choose to do in free time. (2) Prefer activities, privileges and social rewards that are naturally available at school and cost nothing; Binder et al. chose rewards that were liked and not otherwise available. (3) Try a candidate briefly and check whether the behaviour increases. Only a consequence that increases behaviour counts as a reinforcer. (4) Build a menu with several options, graded by value. [source: Udel guide; Binder et al. 1977; step 3 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "If you could choose one thing to do for five minutes at the end of the lesson, what would it be?"
Watch for: satiation; rewards the family or the school does not accept; food rewards [synthesis]. Working when: the target behaviour rises once the reward is made contingent.

B. Building wanted behaviour

4.5 Rules–praise–ignoring (Regeln, Lob, Ignorieren)

Purpose: The core class-wide package. Rules alone have little effect. Rules combined with approval of appropriate behaviour and ignoring of minor misbehaviour are very effective. [source: Madsen et al. 1968]
Steps: (1) Agree a few short, positively worded classroom rules and post them. The KlasseKinderSpiel study used three, such as "Ich sitze still" and "Ich melde mich" ("I sit still", "I put my hand up") [source: Hagen et al. 2023]. (2) Review the rules at the start of lessons [synthesis]. (3) "Catch them being good": give specific approval for rule-following, naming the rule. (4) Ignore minor disruption that is not dangerous and is not maintained by peers. (5) Praise a nearby pupil who is following the rule. (6) Track the teacher's ratio of approval to disapproval and aim for clearly more approval [ratio: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Jonas, you put your hand up and waited. That's exactly our rule."
Watch for: praise that is global ("good boy"), delayed or sarcastic; ignoring behaviour that peers are reinforcing. Thomas et al. found that increasing disapproval raised disruption. Working when: on-task behaviour rises and the teacher's disapproval falls. [source: Thomas et al. 1968; Madsen et al. 1968]

4.6 Contingent social reinforcement: attention, praise, approval (Zuwendung, Lob, Anerkennung)

Purpose: Teacher attention is the main reinforcer in classrooms. Give it on purpose for wanted behaviour. The handbook includes a practice programme for teachers and nonverbal approval (Kazdin & Klock). [source: handbook TOC 793272; Thomas et al. 1968]
Steps: (1) List the behaviours to approve. (2) Vary the form: verbal, smile, nod, thumbs-up, brief touch on the shoulder where appropriate. (3) Deliver it immediately and specifically. (4) Practise with the teacher by role-playing or by cueing yourself, for example praising each time a timer sounds [synthesis]. (5) Self-record approval counts. [steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "You've finished three problems already. Nice steady work."
Watch for: older pupils embarrassed by public praise; use private or nonverbal forms instead [synthesis]. Working when: the target rises in the lessons with high approval.

4.7 Premack principle ("first ... then ...")

Purpose: Use a preferred activity as the consequence for completing a less preferred one. This is the basis of contingency contracting ("if you have learned x, you may do y"). [source: Binder et al. 1977, contract form] [uncertain: Premack and Homme's original rules]
Steps: (1) Identify a high-probability activity, such as computer time or helping the teacher. (2) State the order: the less-liked task first, then the preferred activity. (3) Keep the required task short at first. (4) Deliver the preferred activity as soon as the task is done.
Example language (illustrative): "First these five sentences, then you can feed the fish."
Watch for: the preferred activity being given anyway. Working when: tasks are finished faster and with less prompting.

4.8 Shaping (differential reinforcement, Verhaltensformung)

Purpose: Build a behaviour the pupil does not yet show by reinforcing successive approximations. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1; Kiese-Himmel 2010]
Steps: (1) Define the end goal, for example 20 minutes of seat work. (2) Start from the baseline level, for example 3 minutes. (3) Reinforce the first step until it is reliable. (4) Raise the criterion in small steps. (5) If performance breaks down, drop back one step. [steps: synthesis on standard shaping]
Example language (illustrative): "Yesterday you worked four minutes straight. Today let's see if you can do five; I'll set the timer."
Watch for: steps that are too large, which cause failure, or too small, which slow progress. Working when: each criterion is met within a few days.

4.9 Prompting and fading (Ein- und Ausblenden)

Purpose: Use extra cues to get the behaviour going, then withdraw them gradually so that it comes under natural control. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1]
Steps: (1) Choose a prompt: a verbal reminder, a gesture, a picture card on the desk, or the question-mark and exclamation-mark signal cards that Binder et al. used to show "I need help" and "I'm finished". (2) Pair the prompt with the natural cue. (3) Reduce the prompt step by step, from verbal to gesture to glance to none. [source: Binder et al. 1977 signal cards; fading steps synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): (points to rule poster without speaking)
Watch for: prompt dependence. Working when: the behaviour occurs to the natural cue alone.

4.10 Chaining (Verkettung)

Purpose: Teach multi-step routines, such as getting ready for a lesson or a transition, as linked steps. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1]
Steps: (1) Task-analyse the routine: materials out, book open, name on sheet, start task. (2) Teach and reinforce step by step, forward or backward. (3) Use a visible checklist. (4) Reinforce completion of the whole chain. [steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Check your start list: pencil, book, page, go."
Watch for: a skipped step breaking the chain. Working when: the routine runs without prompting.

4.11 Reinforcement schedules and thinning (Verstärkungspläne; Reduzierung von Verstärkungsplänen)

Purpose: Continuous reinforcement gives fast learning but the behaviour also extinguishes quickly. Intermittent reinforcement makes it more durable. [source: Kiese-Himmel 2010; handbook TOC 795832, chs. 1–2]
Steps: (1) Reinforce every occurrence while the behaviour is new. (2) Once the criterion has been stable for a period, switch to every 2nd or 3rd occurrence, or variable intervals. (3) Keep thinning and replace backup rewards with praise and natural consequences. [stability criterion and steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "From now on I'll check your card at the end of each lesson instead of every ten minutes."
Watch for: thinning too fast, which makes the behaviour collapse. Working when: the behaviour holds at the leaner schedule.

4.12 Token economy (Münzverstärkung, Token- or Punktesystem)

Purpose: Give immediate, countable conditioned reinforcers (points, stamps, coins) that are later exchanged for backup rewards. Useful when social reinforcement alone is too weak. [source: handbook TOC 793272 (simple teacher programme; Kuypers, Becker & O'Leary on why token systems fail); Binder et al. 1977]
Steps: (1) Define 2–3 target behaviours. (2) Choose a token and a recording sheet. (3) Set up a backup menu. Binder et al. used a reinforcement corner with toys and games in point categories, and pupils chose their own rewards. (4) Explain the rules and check that pupils understand them. (5) Give tokens immediately, paired with praise and the reason. (6) Hold exchanges at fixed times. (7) Plan to fade from the start: lengthen intervals, raise prices, replace tokens with praise and self-rating. [source: Binder et al. 1977; Udel guide on explaining each token; fading synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "That's a point for starting right away. You've got four, and six gets you the reading corner."
Watch for: systems that fail because tokens are not tied to specific behaviours, praise is not paired, or the system is run inconsistently [uncertain: the Kuypers et al. content, known only by its title in the TOC]. Also watch for pupils with higher social status responding less [source: Binder et al. 1977]. Working when: the targets rise and the system can be thinned without relapse.

4.13 Contingency contract (Kontingenzvertrag, Verhaltensvertrag)

Purpose: A written, negotiated agreement of the form "if you do x, you get y". It makes expectations, criteria and rewards explicit and gives the pupil a say. The plan is to move gradually from contracts the teacher sets to contracts the pupil sets: a "macro-contract" under which pupils write their own "micro-contracts". [source: Binder et al. 1977; handbook TOC 793272 (contracts as an economical consultation model, MacDonald et al.); Udel guide]
Steps: (1) Negotiate with the pupil, and decide who else is involved (parents, other teachers). (2) Pick a behaviour that is easy to identify and matters. (3) Let the pupil help choose rewards; prefer ones that cost nothing. (4) Specify the criterion, how much reward, how often and who delivers it. Reward small approximations at the start. (5) Add any mild consequence in concrete terms. (6) Set a timeline and review date. (7) Everyone signs and gets a copy. (8) Record progress daily, for example a checklist in the pupil's folder initialled by the teacher. (9) Deliver rewards promptly, with praise and the reason. (10) Review, renegotiate and write the next contract. Fade once conduct is stable. [source: Udel guide, paraphrased]
Example language (illustrative): "Let's write down what you'll do, what I'll do, and what you earn. Is this fair to you? What would make it fairer?"
Watch for: contracts the pupil had no real say in; vague criteria; rewards for obedience instead of achievement [synthesis]. Working when: the pupil meets the criterion and starts proposing next goals.

4.14 Group contingencies and class games (Gruppenkontingenz, Klassenspiele)

Purpose: Make a reward depend on the behaviour of the whole class or of a team. This uses peer influence and is economical. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2]
Steps: (1) Choose a type. In a dependent contingency the class earns if one pupil or a few pupils meet the goal. In an interdependent contingency everyone earns if the group meets the goal. [taxonomy: synthesis] (2) Set a reachable criterion. (3) Make progress visible on the board. (4) Deliver the group reward reliably.
Example language (illustrative): "If the class stays under eight call-outs this lesson, we finish with the quiz game."
Watch for: one pupil being blamed for costing the group; this is a scapegoating risk [synthesis]. Working when: peers start prompting each other positively.

4.15 Good Behavior Game / KlasseKinderSpiel

Purpose: A team-based game in which teams compete to break as few rules as possible during a set lesson phase. It was developed by Barrish, Saunders & Wolf (1969) and adapted for German classrooms as the KlasseKinderSpiel by Hillenbrand & Pütz (2008). [source: Hagen et al. 2023; Binder et al. 1977 cites Barrish et al.] [uncertain: the German manual itself (Hillenbrand & Pütz)]
Steps: (1) Agree on about three simple rules with the class and post them. (2) Divide the class into 2–4 teams, for example existing table groups, and let each team choose a name. (3) Announce the game and start a visible timer, typically 10–20 minutes, in the hardest lesson phase. (4) Each rule break is a "foul" and earns the team a mark on the board; name the foul neutrally and do not discuss it. (5) At the end, the team with the fewest fouls wins, or every team under a set threshold wins; the study used fewer than 5. (6) Give a small group reward, an object or an activity. (7) Play daily. Lengthen the playing time and vary when the game is played, and check whether the effect carries over to the rest of the day. [source: Hagen et al. 2023; step 7 lengthening: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "The game starts now, ten minutes. Team Tigers, that's a foul for calling out." (said calmly, then the lesson continues)
Watch for: high-risk pupils may need an additional individual plan; a team repeatedly losing because of one pupil; teacher drift without a checklist (the study used a fidelity checklist and coaching). Working when: foul counts fall and teachers report better behaviour outside the game. [source: Hagen et al. 2023]

4.16 Peer-mediated reinforcement (Verhaltensmodifikation durch Schüler, Verstärkung durch Gleichaltrige)

Purpose: Peers often maintain disruption, through laughter and attention. Redirect that attention to wanted behaviour, or train pupils as reinforcing agents. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2]
Steps: (1) Identify the peers whose reactions maintain the behaviour. (2) Teach a peer helper or tutor to praise or give points for the target behaviour. (3) Reward the peer for doing this accurately. (4) Monitor how the agents behave. [steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Your job this week is to notice when Ben starts straight away and tell him. You earn a point every time you do it."
Watch for: peers policing or shaming each other. Working when: peer laughter at disruption falls and peers support the target.

4.17 Seating and reinforcement areas (Sitzordnung, Verstärkungsbereiche)

Purpose: Arrange the room so that wanted behaviour is easier: seating, a defined reward or activity corner, and work areas. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2; Binder et al. 1977 reinforcement corner]
Steps: (1) Use the SORKC data to find seating triggers, such as near friends, the window or the door. (2) Seat the pupil near the teacher's usual position and next to calm models. (3) Set up a reward or activity area used only for earned time. (4) Structure materials so tasks are short, clear and at the right level, as in Binder et al. [steps 1–2 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Let's try you at this table this week, close to where I teach from."
Watch for: seating that is used as a punishment and so becomes stigmatising. Working when: the antecedent-linked behaviour falls without any added consequences.

4.18 Feedback

Purpose: Give pupils specific information about their performance against the criterion. This is listed as a basic procedure and was used continuously in Binder et al. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1; Binder et al. 1977]
Steps: (1) Give feedback against the posted rule or criterion. (2) Make it immediate and specific, and say what is next. (3) Use visual feedback such as charts and posters. [steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "You were on task for 8 of 10 checks. Last week it was 5."
Watch for: feedback that is only negative. Working when: pupils can tell you their own scores and goals.

4.19 Modelling and vicarious reinforcement (Modelllernen, stellvertretende Verstärkung)

Purpose: Pupils learn by watching others being reinforced. Praising a nearby pupil for the target behaviour also cues the observing pupil. Demonstrations and films can teach the rules. [source: handbook TOC 793272 (practice in vicarious reinforcement; Kazdin study on attentiveness); Binder et al. 1977 (instruction film modelling the rules, class discussion, comprehension checks); Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 7.3]
Steps: (1) When the target pupil is off task, praise one or two neighbours who are on task, naming the behaviour. (2) As soon as the target pupil complies, praise them. (3) To teach new rules, demonstrate or show a model doing them, discuss, and check understanding with questions. (4) Choose models the pupil sees as similar or as having status [step 4: synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Lea and Tim already have their books open on page 12. Thank you." ... "Max, you too. Great."
Watch for: constantly praising the same "good" pupils, which builds resentment. Working when: the observer imitates quickly.

C. Reducing unwanted behaviour

Always pair a reducing procedure with reinforcement of an alternative behaviour. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1 lists reinforcing incompatible and alternative behaviour alongside extinction and punishment; pairing rule: synthesis]

4.20 Extinction / planned ignoring (Löschung, Ignorieren)

Purpose: Withdraw the reinforcer that maintains a behaviour, usually teacher attention, so that the behaviour declines. [source: Kiese-Himmel 2010; Madsen et al. 1968]
Steps: (1) Use only when the SORKC analysis shows attention maintains the behaviour and it is safe to ignore. (2) Agree exactly which behaviours will be ignored. (3) Withhold eye contact, comment and facial reaction. (4) At the same moment, attend to the pupil the moment they show the alternative. (5) Expect the behaviour to get worse first and hold steady. [steps 1, 2, 4 and 5 synthesis; the burst is a standard operant finding, not stated in the sources]
Example language (illustrative): (no reaction to calling out) ... "Thanks for raising your hand, Mia, what's your answer?"
Watch for: the extinction burst; intermittent giving-in, which makes the behaviour stronger; peers still reinforcing it; never ignore danger, aggression or bullying [synthesis]. Working when: after an initial rise, the frequency falls over days.

4.21 Differential reinforcement of incompatible or alternative behaviour (Verstärkung inkompatiblen / alternativen Verhaltens)

Purpose: Reduce a problem behaviour by reinforcing one that cannot occur at the same time (sitting versus wandering) or that serves the same function more acceptably (raising a hand versus calling out). [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1]
Steps: (1) Choose an incompatible or functionally equivalent behaviour. (2) Teach it if it is missing. (3) Reinforce it densely. (4) Put the problem behaviour on extinction. [steps: synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "When you need a break, show me the break card instead of throwing the book."
Watch for: an alternative that is harder to perform than the problem behaviour. Working when: the alternative replaces the problem behaviour.

4.22 Response cost (Reaktionskosten, Verstärkerentzug)

Purpose: Lose a specified amount of an earned reinforcer (points, minutes of free time) for a specified behaviour. It is indirect punishment. [source: handbook TOC 793272; Binder et al. 1977 (points removed for shouting or loud talk, with the broken rule named); Kiese-Himmel 2010]
Steps: (1) Use it only inside a working reinforcement system, so the pupil earns far more than they lose. (2) Announce the cost in advance and post it. (3) When the behaviour occurs, remove the points calmly and briefly, name the rule, and do not argue. (4) Never let the balance go below zero. Make sure losses do not wipe out the motivation to keep earning. [step 1: source Binder et al. 1977; steps 3–4 partly synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "That's calling out. One point off. You still have six."
Watch for: escalation, "I don't care anyway" reactions, and teachers deducting in anger. Working when: the targeted behaviour falls while the pupil keeps earning.

4.23 Time-out from positive reinforcement (Auszeit, sozialer Ausschluss)

Purpose: Briefly remove the pupil from access to reinforcement, such as peer attention or classroom activity, after a defined serious behaviour. It is listed among procedures for inhibiting disruption. [source: handbook TOC 793272 (time-out and response cost, practice programme; Burchard & Barrera); handbook TOC 795832 ch. 1 (sozialer Ausschluss)] [uncertain: chapter contents; the procedural detail below is synthesis]
Consent and safety: Agree the plan with school leadership and parents. Use it only where permitted by school rules and your Land's or country's school law. Never lock a pupil in, use physical force to move them, or leave them unsupervised. Use it only for attention-maintained behaviour; time-out is contraindicated for escape-maintained behaviour, where it rewards the pupil. [synthesis]
Steps: (1) Define the specific behaviours that lead to time-out. (2) Choose the least restrictive form first: inside the classroom, for example a chair at the edge of the activity, before any supervised place outside it. (3) Explain the procedure to the pupil in advance, calmly. (4) When the behaviour occurs, give one short, neutral instruction. (5) Keep it short, a few minutes [synthesis]. (6) On return, re-engage the pupil at once and reinforce the next appropriate behaviour. (7) Log every use and review it with the team.
Example language (illustrative): "That's hitting. Time-out chair, three minutes." ... "Welcome back. We're on question 4."
Watch for: time-out being longer, more frequent or used as general punishment; the pupil enjoying the time-out; lost learning time. Working when: uses fall over weeks. If they do not, stop and re-analyse.

4.24 Reprimand and other punishment (Bestrafung)

Purpose: The tradition lists punishment among procedures for reducing behaviour. The sources stress its limits: it suppresses behaviour only temporarily and produces fear and avoidance. Tripling teacher disapproval increased disruption in Thomas et al. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1; Kiese-Himmel 2010; Thomas et al. 1968]
Steps (if used at all): (1) Use only after positive methods are in place. (2) Make it brief, private and calm, and name the rule and the alternative. (3) Never humiliate, threaten, or use physical or collective punishment. [synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): (quietly at the desk) "Stop drawing on Paul's sheet. Work on your own sheet, please."
Watch for: reprimands rising while the behaviour does not fall; this means the reprimand is acting as attention. Working when: reprimands become rare.

D. Self-control procedures (Selbstkontrolle)

4.25 Self-observation and self-recording (Selbstbeobachtung, Selbstkodierung)

Purpose: The pupil records their own target behaviour. This often reduces disruption even before any goals are set, and it begins the move from teacher control to self-control. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2; Fitzner & Thomas 2006; Redlich 2000]
Steps: (1) Derive 3–5 yes/no categories from the rules, for example "materials ready", "did not interrupt", "waited quietly". (2) Give the pupil a sheet with a check at the end of each lesson or at a timer signal. (3) The teacher keeps a parallel sheet at first. (4) Compare the two briefly and reward accurate self-ratings. (5) Reduce the teacher checks to spot checks. Binder et al. found about 78% of self-ratings correct and judged this sufficient. [source: Redlich 2000 (parallel teacher sheet); Binder et al. 1977; step 4 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Before we check together: how many ticks would you give yourself for 'stayed in my seat'?"
Watch for: inflated ratings when rewards depend on them, so reward accuracy as well as level [synthesis]. Working when: pupil and teacher ratings converge and the behaviour improves.

4.26 Self-evaluation against a standard

Purpose: The pupil compares their own work or behaviour with a model or criterion and corrects it. [source: Binder et al. 1977]
Steps: (1) Give a model solution or control sheet. (2) The pupil marks matches and mismatches. (3) The pupil scores the work by the number of errors. (4) The pupil corrects errors before moving on. (5) The teacher spot-checks and gradually withdraws. [source: Binder et al. 1977, paraphrased]
Example language (illustrative): "Check your answers against the solution card, give yourself the score, then fix the ones that don't match."
Watch for: pupils copying the solutions; checks that are too infrequent. Working when: self-scores are accurate on spot checks.

4.27 Self-reinforcement (selbstbestimmte Verstärkung)

Purpose: The pupil awards their own points or privileges against an agreed criterion. This is the end point of the shift towards self-directed contracts. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 2; Binder et al. 1977; Fitzner & Thomas 2006 (Kanfer's self-regulation model)]
Steps: (1) Introduce it only after self-recording is accurate. (2) Agree the criterion and the reward with the pupil. (3) The pupil decides whether they met the criterion and takes the reward. (4) The teacher spot-checks and praises honest self-assessment. (5) Let the pupil set the next goals (a micro-contract within a macro-contract). [steps: synthesis based on Binder et al. 1977]
Example language (illustrative): "You decide whether today counts. If it does, you colour the box and pick from your list."
Watch for: lenient standards. Working when: the behaviour holds when teacher-delivered contingencies are absent.

E. Cognitive and relaxation additions

The Examensarbeit groups methods as conditioning-based, cognitively oriented, modelling-based and relaxation-oriented. Goetze treats cognitive behaviour modification as a separate chapter. [source: Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 7; Goetze 2010 table of contents] [uncertain: the chapter contents; the procedures below follow the standard form of these methods]

4.28 Self-instruction training (kognitive Verhaltensmodifikation)

Purpose: Teach impulsive pupils to guide their work with inner speech. [uncertain: attributed in the field to Meichenbaum's cognitive behaviour modification]
Steps: (1) The teacher models a task while thinking aloud: what is the task, plan, do, check, praise self. (2) The pupil does the task while the teacher instructs aloud. (3) The pupil does it while instructing themselves aloud. (4) The pupil whispers. (5) The pupil uses covert self-instruction. A cue card with picture steps supports the process. [standard sequence; uncertain as to the source used]
Example language (illustrative): "Watch me: What do I have to do? ... First I read the whole question. ... Let me check. ... Good, I did it carefully."
Watch for: rote recitation without slowing down. Working when: fewer careless errors and starts that are less impulsive.

4.29 Relaxation-oriented methods (an Entspannung orientierte Methoden)

Purpose: Lower arousal in tense or anxious pupils, or in the whole class after breaks. [source: Examensarbeit 2016 ch. 7.4; Goetze 2010 ch. 11] [uncertain: the specific methods are not visible in the sources]
Steps: (1) Choose a short, age-appropriate exercise, such as guided breathing or brief progressive muscle relaxation. (2) Practise it at fixed times, for example after the break. (3) Cue it before known triggers. [synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Feet flat, hands on the desk, three slow breaths with me."
Watch for: pupils with trauma histories who find closing their eyes unsafe; offer an eyes-open option [synthesis]. Working when: transitions are calmer.

F. Cooperative behaviour modification (Kooperative Verhaltensmodifikation / Kooperative Methode)

[source for 4.30–4.37: Redlich 2000; Fitzner & Thomas 2006]

4.30 Teacher's own view and class survey (card method, questionnaire)

Purpose: Phase 1 (Erkundung). Build a shared picture of the problem in which all views count.
Steps: (1) The teacher describes the problem and their own reactions openly. (2) Pupils write what they like and what disturbs them on coloured cards, or answer an anonymous questionnaire with categories such as often, sometimes, rarely. (3) Cluster the cards on a board. (4) Return the results to the class and discuss them. Aim for open exchange, not harmony. [source: Redlich 2000]
Example language (illustrative): "Here's how I see our lessons, including what I do that may not help. Now I want your view. Anonymous cards, one idea per card."
Watch for: aimless discussion, or the teacher using the survey to push their own goals, which pupils experience as manipulation. [source: Redlich 2000] Working when: pupils recognise the clustered picture as fair.

4.31 Interaction chain (Interaktionskette)

Purpose: Show how a disruption builds through teacher and pupil moves, so that points for intervention become visible and no single party is to blame.
Steps: (1) Take one typical episode. (2) Draw it as a sequence: teacher action, then pupil action, then teacher reaction, and so on. (3) Mark the links where either side could act differently. [source: Redlich 2000; step 3 detail synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "So: I explain for a long time, some of you switch off, I raise my voice, it gets louder. Where could we break this?"
Watch for: the chain turning into blame. Working when: both sides name their own links.

4.32 Complementary agreement (Vereinbarung)

Purpose: Phase 2 (Planung). Set binding rules for both teacher and pupils that are designed to interlock.
Steps: (1) Collect ideas for goals and ways to reach them from both sides. (2) Select a few concrete rules for pupils and matching rules for the teacher. In Redlich's example, dominant pupils hold back, quiet pupils contribute more, the teacher gives more time and uses a signal to remind. (3) Write them down, state the duration and the feedback, and inform parents and other subject teachers. [source: Redlich 2000; Fitzner & Thomas 2006]
Example language (illustrative): "Your rule: no calling out. My rule: short explanations and I wait for at least five hands before I pick someone."
Watch for: agreements that bind only the pupils. Working when: both sides keep their part, as the self-observation data show.

4.33 Board tally with a class target (Strichliste)

Purpose: Phase 3 (Veränderung). Make disruption visible and give the class a goal it can reach.
Steps: (1) Tally disturbances on the board during the agreed lesson phase. (2) The class sets a target value. (3) If the class stays under it, the class earns reward time. (4) Lower the target gradually. [source: Redlich 2000; step 4 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Our target today is under six. We're at three with ten minutes to go."
Watch for: tallies used as public shaming of individuals. Working when: the tally falls and the class itself refers to the target.

4.34 Earned free time with deduction (Grundspielzeit)

Purpose: A class-level response-cost system for younger pupils. In a first-grade example, the class earned 10 minutes of free time per lesson minus time lost to slow starts. The time was shown with a sand timer and saved up over four weeks into longer blocks.
Steps: (1) Grant a base amount of earned time. (2) Run a visible timer whenever the class delays. (3) Subtract that time. (4) Pay out the remaining time reliably. (5) Bundle it into larger blocks to build delay tolerance. [source: Redlich 2000]
Example language (illustrative): "The sand is running. Every second we wait comes off our play time."
Watch for: the time reaching zero early in the lesson. Set a floor so the class always keeps some time [synthesis]. Working when: starts become quicker.

4.35 Success poster (Erfolgsposter)

Purpose: Show progress visibly to sustain motivation.
Steps: (1) Chart the class's daily data or goal attainment on a poster. (2) Mark milestones. (3) Celebrate when one is reached. [source: Redlich 2000; Fitzner & Thomas 2006]
Example language (illustrative): "Look at the line: three weeks ago we were at fifteen, now we're at four."
Watch for: posters left without updates. Working when: pupils ask to update it.

4.36 Teacher self-observation and pupils measuring the teacher

Purpose: Make the teacher's part of the agreement observable. Pupils sometimes time how long the teacher waits before taking answers.
Steps: (1) The teacher keeps a self-observation sheet on their own rules. (2) Pupils act as observers of specific teacher behaviours, for example with a stopwatch. (3) Discuss the results in the class's feedback rounds. [source: Redlich 2000]
Example language (illustrative): "Anna, you're timekeeper: tell me how long I wait before I choose someone."
Watch for: a teacher who feels exposed; prepare them in consultation [synthesis]. Working when: teacher targets are met and pupils experience fairness.

4.37 Closing review and outlook (Rückblick, Perspektive)

Purpose: Phase 4 (Abschluss). Consolidate gains and decide what comes next.
Steps: (1) Use a questionnaire developed with the class: what went well, what did not. (2) Decide what to keep, what else to tackle, and whether to start a new project or pause. (3) Drop aids that are no longer needed. [source: Redlich 2000]
Example language (illustrative): "Which of our rules do we keep without the tally? Which one still needs help?"
Watch for: stopping abruptly with no maintenance plan. Working when: the class names habits it wants to keep.

G. Evaluation and maintenance

4.38 Graphing and evaluation (grafische Darstellung; experimental check)

Purpose: Judge effects against the baseline. Optionally, briefly return to baseline conditions (reversal) to confirm that the plan caused the change. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 3; handbook TOC 793272 (setting up and running behaviour-modification experiments in school); Binder et al. 1977; Madsen et al. 1968]
Steps: (1) Plot one data point per day: baseline, then intervention. (2) Review the graph weekly with the teacher. (3) If there is no change after about 1–2 weeks of faithful delivery, re-analyse [synthesis]. (4) Consider a short reversal only when it is ethical and the teacher agrees; often a staggered start across pupils or lessons is preferable [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Here's your baseline, here's the week we started. What do you see?"
Watch for: decisions made from single bad days. Working when: the trend separates clearly from the baseline.

4.39 Generalisation and maintenance planning (Reizgeneralisierung, Differenzierung; Aufrechterhaltung)

Purpose: Gains under contingencies may not transfer to other lessons or last after the plan ends. Build transfer in deliberately. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 1 (stimulus generalisation, discrimination); Binder et al. 1977, citing Walker, Hops & Johnson 1975; Hagen et al. 2023 (transfer measured outside game times)]
Steps: (1) Extend the plan to other teachers and lessons with the same rules and the same signal. (2) Thin schedules and move to praise and natural rewards. (3) Move to self-control (4.25–4.27). (4) Schedule follow-up checks, for example after 4 months as in Binder et al. (5) Treat social behaviour and work behaviour as separate targets, because gains in one did not carry over automatically to the other. [source: Binder et al. 1977; steps 1–2 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative, to colleagues): "Could you use the same three rules and the same hand signal in your lessons too?"
Watch for: improvement in one teacher's lessons only. Working when: gains hold across settings and at follow-up.

5. Handling problems

Each item is tagged by where the guidance comes from. Most of the response guidance is [synthesis], because the sources describe procedures more than troubleshooting.

No change after 1–2 weeks (stuck) [synthesis]

Check delivery first. Observe a lesson, or have the teacher self-record for a day: is reinforcement actually immediate, contingent and frequent?
Check the reinforcer. Is it valued, or has the pupil had too much of it? Re-sample (4.4). [source: Udel guide: a reward the pupil does not value will not work]
Check the function. Escape-maintained behaviour does not respond to attention-based plans; adjust task difficulty and teach a way to ask for a break (4.21).
Lower the criterion (4.8). Redlich: goals low enough to be reached easily. [source: Redlich 2000]

The behaviour gets worse after ignoring or response cost starts [synthesis]

Expect an extinction burst. Agree beforehand that the team will hold steady for several days, and keep reinforcing the alternative.
Stop ignoring at once if the behaviour becomes dangerous. Switch to a safety response and re-plan.
If losses produce "I don't care", raise the rate of earning, put a floor under losses (4.22), or drop response cost.

Teacher non-adherence or drift

Simplify to one target and one procedure. Give a one-page checklist and coach briefly and regularly; the KlasseKinderSpiel study used a fidelity checklist and check-ins, and cites the need for training and ongoing support. [source: Hagen et al. 2023]
Show the teacher their own data, such as the approval-to-disapproval ratio. Teachers' own behaviour drives pupil behaviour. [source: Thomas et al. 1968]
Ask about workload and stress. Goetze includes a chapter on occupational stress. [source: Goetze 2010 TOC; response synthesis]

Teacher reverting to control or threats when setbacks come

Redlich expects errors and setbacks and recommends discussing goal corrections with the class rather than going back to control. Reframe the setback as data and hold a short correction talk with the class. [source: Redlich 2000]

Pupil resistance ("It's unfair", "I won't play", contracts refused) [synthesis, partly based on Redlich 2000 and the Udel guide]

Increase participation: let the pupil choose rewards, co-write the contract, and add an obligation for the teacher too (4.32).
Start with an easy win to build success.
With adolescents, use private feedback and self-monitoring rather than public points.

Class feels manipulated in cooperative work

Redlich warns that a survey used to push the teacher's own goals is experienced as manipulation. Be transparent about your aims and keep your own goals open to negotiation. [source: Redlich 2000]

"Bribery", "coldness" or "manipulation" objections from colleagues and parents

These are classic objections, and the tradition answers them as part of the work. [source: handbook TOC 795832, ch. 5 (FAQ topics)] Response [synthesis]: rewards are contingent on effortful achievement, not on stopping misbehaviour on demand; they are planned to be faded to natural consequences and self-control; procedures are transparent and agreed with the pupil and parents.

Token system failing [synthesis; Kuypers et al. title only seen]

Common causes: tokens not tied to defined behaviours, praise not paired with tokens, inconsistent delivery, backup rewards not valued, no fading plan. Fix each in turn.
Pupils with higher social status responded less to contingencies in Binder et al. Use social or leadership roles as reinforcers for them. [source: Binder et al. 1977; response synthesis]

Peers maintain the behaviour

Use a group contingency or the GBG (4.14–4.15) so peer attention supports the target behaviour. Reinforce peers for ignoring disruption (4.16). [synthesis]

Scapegoating in group contingencies [synthesis]

Use thresholds that allow several teams to win; the KlasseKinderSpiel study used a winning threshold that more than one team could meet [source: Hagen et al. 2023]. Move a repeatedly targeted pupil onto an individual plan, and never announce publicly who caused a team's loss.

High-risk pupils not helped by class-wide methods

The GBG may not be intensive enough for high-risk pupils. Combine it with individual plans (contracts, functional analysis) or further support. [source: Hagen et al. 2023, citing Ashworth et al. 2020]

Gains do not generalise, or relapse after fading

Social and work behaviour need separate contingencies. Gains under external control can vanish when contingencies end. Return to the last effective schedule, then fade more slowly through self-control steps (4.25–4.27) and plan transfer across lessons (4.39). [source: Binder et al. 1977; response synthesis]

Inaccurate self-ratings

Use spot checks and reward accuracy. Binder et al. judged about 78% correct as enough for classroom use. [source: Binder et al. 1977; reward for accuracy is synthesis]

Rupture in the teacher–pupil relationship [synthesis; Goetze 2010 stresses that methods depend on relationship quality]

Pause reducing procedures. Have the teacher hold a short, private repair talk: acknowledge their own part, listen actively and use I-messages. These Gordon-based dialogue tools are part of the Kooperative Methode [source: Redlich 2000]. Restart with a higher rate of approval.

Overwhelm: pupil escalating, crisis, aggression [synthesis]

Planned ignoring and response cost are not crisis tools. Make safety first: give calm, brief instructions, remove the audience, and follow the school's crisis plan and duty of care.
Debrief later. Run a SORKC on the episode and add antecedent changes and a calming routine (4.29).
Goetze covers Life-Space-Crisis-Intervention as a separate method for crisis talks. [source: Goetze 2010 TOC; uncertain: content]

Time-out problems [synthesis]

If time-out is used often, is long, or the pupil seems to want it, stop. This suggests escape or attention from the process.
Never use locked rooms, restraint to enforce time-out, or unsupervised isolation. Check national and regional school law and school rules.

Underlying conditions or risk signs [synthesis]

Persistent difficulties may reflect ADHD, learning disorders, language disorders, anxiety, trauma or maltreatment. Arrange appropriate diagnostic assessment and, where relevant, child-protection procedures, alongside classroom work. Medication questions belong with the child's physician.
If self-harm or suicidal statements come up, do not handle them with classroom contingencies. Follow standard risk-assessment practice and the school's safeguarding procedure: ask directly and calmly, assess current risk, involve parents and specialist services as indicated, and arrange safety planning. Where relevant, include lethal-means counselling about safe storage and removal.

Parents disagree or undermine the plan [synthesis]

Involve parents from the contract stage onward, as the Udel guide and Fitzner & Thomas both recommend [source]. Share the data, offer a simple home link such as a daily report card, and settle for a school-only plan if needed.

Sources

Sources: