Cited by 15Behavioral and Psychological StudiesReading and Literacy DevelopmentInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Morningside Academy

Open access
Johnson, Kent·1997·Behavior and Social Issues

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5210/bsi.v7i1.296

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Morningside Academy in Seattle uses many of the procedures from the Good Behavior Game and related behavior analysis studies for students in grades K-10, with exceptional success.

    “The Morningside Academy in Seattle uses many of the procedures from the Good Behavior Game and related behavior analysis studies for students in grades K–10, with exceptional success (Johnson 1997).”

    From Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change (2014) · cites this paper as Johnson 1997

    The paper identifies Morningside Academy as a Seattle school serving grades K–10 and reports average gains of 2.5 grade levels per school year over ten years (MORNINGSIDE ACADEMY; Standardized Tests, page not provided). It describes behavioral instructional methods and a points-based daily report card, but does not say the school uses procedures from the Good Behavior Game. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Johnson, K. R., & Layng, T.V.I. (1992). Breaking the structuralist barrier: Literacy and numeracy with fluency . American Psychologist, 47, 1474-1490. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.11.1475 · DOI
  2. Lindsley, O. R. (1990). Precision teaching: By teachers for children. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22 (3), 10-15.
  3. Whimbey, A., & Lochhead, J. (1982). Problem solving and comprehension. Philadelphia: The Franklin Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, K.
Corresponding author
Johnson, Kent
Venue
Behavior and Social Issues
Published
1997-05
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
31-35
ISSN
  • 1064-9506 (ISSN-L)
  • 2376-6786
OpenAlex
W4233464067
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Behavior and Social Issues (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
private schools, learning disabilities, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, direct instruction, precision teaching, peer tutoring, remedial education, thinking skills instruction, teacher professional development, struggling students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review