Effects of and preference for student‐ and teacher‐implemented good behavior game in early elementary classes

Peltier et al. (2023) tried three ways to run the Good Behavior Game in first- and second-grade rooms.

One class used the usual teacher-led game. A second class let the kids run it. A third class had a researcher run it.

The team watched how much disruptive behavior happened in each room and later asked kids which version they liked best.

All three setups cut disruptive behavior by about the same amount.

When kids voted, they picked the student-run game almost every time.

Teachers did not lose control; the class stayed calm even when children managed the points and rules.

Donaldson et al. (2018) showed kindergarteners could run GBG and still lower disruption. Peltier repeats that finding with slightly older kids and adds clear preference data.

Groves et al. (2019) feared GBG might spark negative peer pressure in special-ed rooms. They saw the opposite—peer relations improved. Peltier’s general-ed data now echo that GBG is safe for peer climate, no matter who leads it.

Spilles (2026) found third-graders liked competitive GBG best. Peltier’s first-graders liked student-led GBG best. Together the studies say “let students shape the format” across elementary grades.

You can hand the clipboard to your students tomorrow. Train two team captains, review the three posted rules, and step back. You keep the same drop in disruption while gaining class-wide buy-in. Start with one subject period, reward with extra recess, and watch peer leaders emerge.