PAX for Everyone? Swedish Teachers’ Perspectives on Adopting a Universal Prevention Model in a Mainstream Education Setting
Maria Jornevald
,
Ingela Broström
,
Lise Pettersson-Roll
,
Hanna Ginner Hau
This study examines Swedish teachers' perceptions of the PAX Good Behavior Game for students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream cl.
- Pub. date: June 15, 2025
- Pages: 83-95
- 31 Downloads
- 97 Views
- 0 Citations
- #Classroom adaptations
- # PAX good behavior game
- # special educational needs (SEN)
- # teacher perceptions.
Abstract:
This study examines Swedish teachers' perceptions of the PAX Good Behavior Game for students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream classrooms. Data were collected through interviews and focus groups with a total of 22 teachers across five schools and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Teachers generally perceived PAX as beneficial for the classroom climate, for themselves as educators, and particularly for students with SEN. They described improvements in clarity, structure, communication, and positive reinforcement, which contributed to a calmer and more inclusive learning environment and supported students' self-regulation. However, several elements of PAX required adaptation, especially for students with more complex needs. Teachers emphasized the importance of balancing fidelity to the model with flexibility, making both minor adjustments and offering individualized support. Certain components, such as Bliim and the competitive aspects of the PAX Game, were noted as challenging in groups with many students requiring extra support. These findings align with prior research, underlining the potential of PAX for supporting students with SEN, while also highlighting the need for thoughtful adaptation and additional supports. Future research should examine how such adaptations can be systematically integrated into the PAX model and explore how teacher skills and student perspectives influence implementation.
classroom adaptations pax good behavior game special educational needs sen teacher perceptions
Keywords: Classroom adaptations, PAX good behavior game, special educational needs (SEN), teacher perceptions.
0
References
Adams, R., Taylor, J., Duncan, A., & Bishop, S. (2016). Peer victimization and educational outcomes in mainstreamed adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(11), 3557–3566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2893-3
All European Academies. (2017). The European code of conduct for research integrity. European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities. https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/
Ashworth, E., Humphrey, N., Lendrum, A., & Hennessey, A. (2020). Beyond “what works”: A mixed-methods study of intervention effect modifiers in the Good Behavior Game. Psychology in the Schools, 57(2), 222–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22312
Barrish, H. H., Saunders, M., & Wolf, M. M. (1969). Good behavior game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2(2), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1969.2-119
Båtevik, F. O. (2019). From school to work: Long-term employment outcomes for former special educational needs students. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 21(1), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.595
Bowman-Perrott, L., Burke, M. D., Zaini, S., Zhang, N., & Vannest, K. (2016). Promoting positive behavior using the Good Behavior Game: A meta-analysis of single-case research. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(3), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300715592355
Bradshaw, C. P., Zmuda, J. H., Kellam, S. G., & Ialongo, N. S. (2009). Longitudinal impact of two universal preventive interventions in first grade on educational outcomes in high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 926–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016644
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Dishion, T. J., & Tipsord, J. M. (2011). Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412
Domitrovich, C. E., Bradshaw, C. P., Berg, J. K., Pas, E. T., Becker, K. D., Musci, R., Embry, D. D., & Ialongo, N. (2016). How do school-based prevention programs impact teachers? Findings from a randomized trial of an integrated classroom management and social-emotional program. Prevention Science, 17(3), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-015-0618-z
Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 327–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
Embry, D. D., Fruth, J. D., Roepcke, E. F., & Richardson, C. (2016). PAX Good Behavior Game manual (4th ed.). PAXIS Institute.
Fallon, L. M., Collier-Meek, M. A., Kurtz, K. D., & DeFouw, E. R. (2018). Emailed implementation supports to promote treatment integrity: Comparing the effectiveness and acceptability of prompts and performance feedback. Journal of School Psychology, 68, 113–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.03.001
Flower, A., McKenna, J. W., Bunuan, R. L., Muething, C. S., & Vega, R. (2014). Effects of the Good Behavior Game on challenging behaviors in school settings. Review of Educational Research, 84(4), 546–571. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314536781
Fonagy, P., Luyten, P., Allison, E., & Campbell, C. (2024). Taking stock to move forward: Where the field of developmental psychopathology might be heading. Development and Psychopathology, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579424000312
Ghaderi, A., Johansson, M., & Enebrink, P. (2017). Pilotstudie av PAX i skolan: En kulturanpassad version av PAX Good Behavior Game. Karolinska Institutet. https://bit.ly/45jZDZt
Groves, E. A., & Austin, J. L. (2019). Does the Good Behavior Game evoke negative peer pressure? Analyses in primary and secondary classrooms. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.513
Holmdahl, A., Schad, E., Nilsson, G., & Kaldo, V. (2023). More than just a game: Teachers’ experiences of the PAX Good Behavior Game. European Journal of Psychology and Educational Research, 6(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejper.6.1.55
Johansson, M., Biglan, A., & Embry, D. (2020). The PAX Good Behavior Game: One model for evolving a more nurturing society. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 23(4), 462–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-020-00323-3
Jornevald, M., Pettersson‐Roll, L., & Hau, H. (2023). The Good Behavior Game for students with special educational needs in mainstream education settings: A scoping review. Psychology in the Schools, 60(10), 3673-3693. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22953
Kellam, S. G., Reid, J., & Balster, R. L. (2008). Effects of a universal classroom behavior program in first and second grades on young adult problem outcomes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95(Suppl 1), S1–S4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.01.006
Kellam, S. G., Wang, W., Mackenzie, A. C. L., Brown, C. H., Ompad, D. C., Or, F., Ialongo, N. S., Poduska, J. M., & Windham, A. (2014). The impact of the Good Behavior Game, a universal classroom-based preventive intervention in first and second grades, on high-risk sexual behaviors and drug abuse and dependence disorders into young adulthood. Prevention Science, 15(Suppl 1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0296-z
Lambert, S. D., & Loiselle, C. G. (2008). Combining individual interviews and focus groups to enhance data richness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(2), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04559.x
Lane, K. L., Buckman, M. M., Oakes, W. P., & Menzies, H. (2020). Tiered systems and inclusion: Potential benefits, clarifications, and considerations. In Educational inclusion (pp. 22). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429344039
Musci, R. J., Pas, E. T., Bettencourt, A. F., Masyn, K. E., Ialongo, N. S., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2019). How do collective student behavior and other classroom contextual factors relate to teachers’ implementation of an evidence-based intervention? A multilevel structural equation model. Development and Psychopathology, 31(5), 1827–1835. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095457941900097X
Public Health Agency of Sweden. (2018). Varför har den psykiska ohälsan ökat bland barn och unga i Sverige? [Why has mental illness increased among children and young people in Sweden?]. https://bit.ly/3ZUGk5h
RAND Europe. (2013). Support for students with special educational needs. European Platform for Investing in Children (EPIC).
Rutakumwa, R., Mugisha, J. O., Bernays, S., Kabunga, E., Tumwekwase, G., Mbonye, M., & Seeley, J. (2020). Conducting in-depth interviews with and without voice recorders: a comparative analysis. Qualitative Research, 20(5), 565–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794119884806
Skinner, C. H., Cashwell, C. S., & Dunn, M. S. (1996). Independent and interdependent group contingencies: Smoothing the rough waters. Special Services in the Schools, 12(1–2), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v12n01_06
Smith, S., Barajas, K., Ellis, B., Moore, C., McCauley, S., & Reichow, B. (2019). A meta-analytic review of randomized controlled trials of the Good Behavior Game. Behavior Modification, 45(4), 641-666. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445519878670
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2022a). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011 [Curriculum for compulsory school, pre-school classes and leisure centers]. https://bit.ly/3Th8DqS
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2024). Särskilt stöd i grundskolan. Läsåret 2023/24 [Special support in compulsory school – Academic year 2023/24]. https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=12766
Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. (2021). PAX i skolan [PAX in schools]. https://bit.ly/3TkN7l6
Swedish School Inspectorate Agency. (2021). Tio år av elevers röster – Skolenkäten 2010–2020 [Ten years of students' voices – The school survey 2010–2020]. https://bit.ly/3HJ9sX4
Tingstrom, D. H., Sterling-Turner, H. E., & Wilczynski, S. M. (2006). The Good Behavior Game: 1969–2002. Behavior Modification, 30(2), 225–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445503261165
United Nations Children’s Fund. (2021). The state of the world’s children 2017: Children in a digital world. UNICEF.
Vargo, K., & Brown, C. (2020). An evaluation of and preference for variations of the Good Behavior Game with students with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 35(4), 560–570. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.174
Woodgate, R. L., Gonzalez, M., Demczuk, L., Snow, W. M., Barriage, S., & Kirk, S. (2020). How do peers promote social inclusion of students with disabilities? A mixed-methods systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 42(18), 2553–2579. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1561955