Because research has shown that strong academic instruction also supports classroom behavior, this meta-analysis examined the empirical evidence supporting the use of instructional choice as a classroom management strategy. We aimed to describe the characteristics of the literature base, calculate the average effect of instructional choice on classroom behavior, and identify the variables that contributed to heterogeneity within findings. We searched for published and gray literature across seven databases. Studies eligible for inclusion (a) took place in grades K-12 educational settings, (b) used instructional choice as the primary intervention, (c) measured student behavioral outcomes, and (d) were conducted using a single-case research design. The analysis includes 34 studies, including 89 individual students and 170 cases. We found instructional choice significantly increased desired classroom behaviors (log response ratio [LRR] = .186, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [.042, .330]), but did not significantly decrease challenging behaviors (LRR = −.468, 95% CI = [−1.1, .163]). Moderator analyses indicated instructional choice is associated with significantly larger increases in behavior for secondary students and when preference assessments are not given. Primary limitations included unexplained heterogeneity and evolving procedures for conducting single-case meta-analyses. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
*Altaweel NoraA. (2018). The effect of choice of iPad-delivered math independent practice of elementary grade students with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity characteristics (Publication No. 10933396) [Doctoral dissertation, Old Dominion]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
2.
BartonE. E.LloydB. P.GastD. L. (2018). Visual analysis of graphic data. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single-case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 179–214). Routledge.
3.
BennerG. J.KutashK.NelsonJ. R.FisherM. B. (2013). Closing the achievement gap of youth with emotional and behavioral disorders through multi-tiered systems of support. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(3), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2013.0018
4.
*BicardD. F.ErvinA.BicardS. C.Baylot-CaseyL. (2012). Differential effects of seating arrangements on disruptive behavior of fifth grade students during independent seatwork. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(2), 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-407
5.
BucalosA. B.LingoA. S. (2005). What kind of “managers” do adolescents really need? Helping middle and secondary teachers manage classrooms effectively. Beyond Behavior, 14(2), 9–14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24011416
CancioE. J.AlbrechtS. F.JohnsB. H. (2014). Combating the attrition of teachers of students with EBD: What can administrators do?Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(5), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451213513053
8.
*Chickie-WolfeL. A. (1998). Effects of choice making on the adaptive behaviors of adolescents with emotional disturbance (Publication No. 9827577) [Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
9.
*ColeC. L.DavenportT. A.BambaraL. M.AgerC. L. (1997). Effects of choice and task preference on the work performance of students with behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 22(2), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874299702200203
10.
*ColeC. L.LevinsonT. R. (2002). Effects of within-activity choices on the challenging behavior of children with severe developmental disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4(1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070200400106
11.
*ConiglioJ.DuPaulG. J. (2000, August4–8). Identification and effects of choice of higher versus lower preference assignments for students at risk for ED [Paper presentation]. 108th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, United States.
12.
ConroyM. A.AlterP. J.SutherlandK. S. (2014). Classroom-based intervention research in the field of EBD: Current practices and future directions. In GarnerP.KauffmanJ.ElliottJ. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of emotional and behavioral difficulties (2nd ed., pp. 465–477). SAGE.
13.
CooperJ. T.ScottT. M. (2017). The keys to managing instruction and behavior: Considering high probability practices. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(2), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417700825
*DavenportT. A. (1998). Effects of choice and preference on the classroom behaviors of students with autism (Publication No. 9831796) [Doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
16.
DeMink-CarthewJ.NetcohS. (2019). Mixed feelings about choice: Exploring variation in middle school student experiences with making choices in a personalized learning project. Research in Middle Level Education, 42(10), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19404476.2019.1693480
17.
*DibleyS.LimL. (1999). Providing choice making opportunities within and between daily school routines. Journal of Behavioral Education, 9(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022888917128
18.
*DunlapG.DePerczelM.ClarkeS.WilsonD.WrightS.WhiteR.GomezA. (1994). Choice making to promote adaptive behavior for students with emotional and behavioral challenges. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(3), 505–518. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-505
19.
*EnnisR. P.LaneK. L.FlemmingS. C. (2021). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies: Supporting students at-risk for EBD with instructional choice during reading. Exceptionality, 29, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2020.1729766
20.
*EnnisR. P.LaneK. L.OakesW. P. (2018). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support instruction: Within-activity choices in third-grade math with null effects. Remedial and Special Education, 39(2), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517734634
21.
*EnnisR. P.LaneK. L.OakesW. P.FlemmingS. C. (2020). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support instruction: Implementing across-activity choices during third-grade reading instruction. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 22(2), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300719870438
22.
EvansM. E.BoucherA. R. (2015). Optimizing the power of choice: Supporting student autonomy to foster motivation and engagement in learning. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(2), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12073
*GunsalusC. C. (1999). The effect of choice on on-task behavior with two middle school students with learning disabilities in an inclusionary setting (Publication No. 9934649) [Doctoral dissertation, Ball State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
25.
HafenC. A.AllenJ. P.MikamiA. Y.GregoryA.HamreB.PiantaR. C. (2012). The pivotal role of adolescent autonomy in secondary school classrooms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9739-2
26.
*HiquianaL. (2017). Examining the effectiveness of choice in task sequence for children with ASD (Publication No. 10603464) [Doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University Carbondale]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
JolivetteK.EnnisR. P.SwoszowskiN. C. (2017). Educator “what-ifs: The feasibility of choice making in the classroom. Beyond Behavior, 26(2), 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295617713977
29.
KatoM. M.FlanneryK. B.TriplettD.SaeteurnS. (2018). Providing preventive support to 9th graders. In FlanneryK. B.HershfeldtP.FreemanJ. (Eds.), Lessons learned on implementation of PBIS in high schools: Current trends and future directions (pp. 54–69). Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (funded by the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education); University of Oregon Press.
30.
*KautzM. E.DeBarR. M.VladescuJ. C.GraffR. B. (2018). A further evaluation of choice of task sequence. The Journal of Special Education, 52(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917735655
31.
KazdinA. E. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
32.
*KernL.BambaraL.FogtJ. (2002). Class-wide curricular modification to improve the behavior of students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290202700408
33.
KernL.ClemensN. H. (2007). Antecedent strategies to promote appropriate classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20206
34.
KernL.GeorgeM. P.WeistM. D. (2016). Supporting students with emotional and behavioral problems: Prevention & intervention strategies. Paul H. Brooks Publishing.
35.
*KernL.MantegnaM. E.VorndranC. M.BailinD.HiltA. (2001). Choice of task sequence to reduce problem behaviors. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070100300102
36.
KernL.StateT. M. (2009). Incorporating choice and preferred activities into classwide instruction. Beyond Behavior, 18(2), 3–11. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24011738
37.
KernL.VorndranC. M.HiltA.RingdahlJ. E.AdelmanB. E.DunlapG. (1998). Choice as an intervention to improve behavior: A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022831507077
38.
KremerK. P.FlowerA.HuangJ.VaughnM. G. (2016). Behavior problems and children’s academic achievement: A test of growth-curve models with gender and racial differences. Children and Youth Services Review, 67, 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.06.003
39.
LandrumT. J.SweigartC. A. (2014). Simple, evidence-based interventions for classic problems of emotional and behavioral disorders. Beyond Behavior, 23(3), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/107429561402300302
40.
LaneK. L.Barton-ArwoodS. M.NelsonJ. R.WehbyJ. (2008). Academic performance of students with emotional and behavioral disorders served in a self-contained setting. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-007-9050-1
41.
LaneK. L.MenziesH. M.EnnisR. P.BezdekJ. (2013). School-wide systems to promote positive behaviors and facilitate instruction. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 7(1), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.3776/joci.2013.v7n1p6-31
42.
LaneK. L.MenziesH. M.EnnisR. P.OakesW. P. (2015). Supporting behavior for school success: A step-by-step guide to key strategies. Guilford Press.
43.
LaneK. L.MenziesH. M.EnnisR. P.OakesW. P. (2018). Effective low-intensity strategies to enhance school success: What every educator needs to know. Beyond Behavior, 27(3), 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295618799044
44.
LaneK. L.MenziesH. M.EnnisR. P.OakesW. P.RoyerD. J.LaneK. S. (2018). Instructional choice: An effective, efficient, low-intensity strategy to support student success. Beyond Behavior, 27(3), 160–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295618786965
45.
*LaneK. L.RoyerD. J.MessengerM. L.CommonE. A.EnnisR. P.SwoggerE. D. (2015). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support academic engagement: Implementation and effects of instructional choice for elementary students in inclusive settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(4), 473–504. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2015.0013
46.
LemonsC. J.KingS. A.DavidsonK. A.BerryessaT. L.GajjaS. A.SacksL. H. (2016). An inadvertent concurrent replication: Same roadmap, different journey. Remedial and Special Education, 37(4), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516631116
47.
LewisT. J.HudsonS.RichterM.JohnsonN. (2004). Scientifically supported practices in emotional and behavioral disorders: A proposed approach and brief review of current practices. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290402900306
48.
*Light ShrinerC. L. (2000). Comparing the effects of teacher- vs. child-sequence tasks on the behavior of young children with developmental disabilities (Publication No. 9954774) [Master’s thesis, University of Minnesota]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
49.
*MarderT. J. (2002). Antecedent analysis of choice and preference on escape maintained challenging behavior of children with developmental disabilities (Publication No. 3048965) [Doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
50.
*MayM. E. (2019). Effects of differential consequences on choice making in students at risk for academic failure. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12, 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-0267-3
51.
MoeyaertM.ZimmermanK. N.LedfordJ. R. (2018). Synthesis and meta-analysis of single case research. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single-case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 393–416). Routledge.
52.
MorganP. L. (2006). Increasing task engagement using preference or choice-making: Some behavioral and methodological factors affecting their efficacy as classroom interventions. Remedial & Special Education, 27, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325060270030601
53.
MunkD. D.ReppA. C. (1994). The relationship between instructional variables and problem behavior: A review. Exceptional Children, 60(5), 390–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299406000502
54.
NagroS. A.FraserD. W.HooksS. D. (2019). Lesson planning with engagement in mind: Proactive classroom management strategies for curriculum instruction. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(3), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451218767905
55.
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2019). Forward together: Helping educators unlock the power of students who learn differently. https://ncld.org/research/forward-together
56.
ObenchainK. M.TaylorS. S. (2005). Behavior management: Making it work in middle and secondary schools. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79, 7–11. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.79.1.7-11
ParkerF.NovakJ.BartellT. (2017). To engage students, give them meaningful choices in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717734188
59.
*PowellS.NelsonB. (1997). Effects of choosing academic assignments on a student with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(1), 181–183. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-181
60.
PustejovskyJ. E. (2015). Measurement-comparable effect sizes for single-case studies of free-operant behavior. Psychological Methods, 20, 342–359. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000019
61.
PustejovskyJ. E. (2018). Using response ratios for meta-analyzing single-case designs with behavioral outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 68, 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.02.003
*RamseyM. L.JolivetteK.PattersonD. P.KennedyC. (2010). Using choice to increase time on-task, task completion, and accuracy for students with emotional/behavior disorders in a residential facility. Education & Treatment of Children, 33(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0085
64.
ReutebuchC. K.El ZeinF.RobertsG. J. (2015). A systematic review of the effects of choice on academic outcomes for students with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 20, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2015.08.002
65.
*RispoliM.LangR.NeelyL.CamargoS.HutchinsN.DavenportK.GoodwynF. (2013). A comparison of within- and across-activity choices for reducing challenging behavior in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Behavioral Education, 22, 66–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-012-9164-y
RomaniukC.MiltenbergerR. (2001). The influence of preference and choice of activity on problem behavior. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 3, 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830070100300303
68.
*RomaniukC.MiltenbergerR.ConyersC.JennerN.JurgensM.RingenbergC. (2002). The influence of activity choice on problem behaviors maintained by escape versus attention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(4), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2002.35-349
69.
RoyerD. J.LaneK. L.CantwellE. D.MessengerM. L. (2017). A systematic review of the evidence base for instructional choice in K–12 settings. Behavioral Disorders, 42, 89–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742916688655
70.
SandomierskiT.MartinezS.FreemanJ. (2018). Providing a safe & supportive high school environment for every student. In FlanneryK. B.HershfeldtP.FreemanJ. (Eds.), Lessons learned on implementation of PBIS in high schools: Current trends and future directions (pp. 81–96). Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (funded by the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education); University of Oregon Press.
71.
Santiago-RosarioM. R.McIntoshK.IzzardS.Cohen LissmanD.CalhounT. E. (2023, September). Is positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) an evidence-based practice?Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. http://www.pbis.org
72.
*SchulmanR. K. (2016). The effects of within-activity choice interventions on problem behavior and task engagement of children with autism spectrum disorder (Publication No. 10297502) [Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
73.
ScottT. M.HirnR. G.BarberH. (2012). Affective disproportional outcomes by ethnicity and grade level: Using discipline data to guide practice in high school. Preventing School Failure, 56, 110–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2011.592168
74.
*SeybertS.DunlapG.FerroJ. (1996). The effects of choice-making on the problem behaviors of high school students with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 6(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02110477
75.
ShogrenK. A.Faggella-LubyM. N.BaeS. J.WehmeyerM. L. (2004). The effect of choice-making as an intervention for problem behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007040060040401
76.
SimonsenB.FairbanksS.BrieschA.MyersD.SugaiG. (2008). Evidence-based practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 351–380. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0007
77.
*SkerbetzM. D.KostewiczD. E. (2013). Academic choice for included students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Preventing School Failure, 57(4), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2012.701252
78.
*SmeltzerS. S.GraffR. B.AhearnW. H.LibbyM. E. (2009). Effect of choice of task sequence on responding. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 3, 734–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2009.02.002
79.
SugaiG.HornerR. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 23–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J019v24n01_03
80.
SugaiG.HornerR. H. (2008). What we know and need to know about preventing problem behavior in schools. Exceptionality, 16, 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830801981138
81.
TaniousR.OhnghenaP. (2021). Applied hybrid single-case experiments published between 2016 and 2020: A systematic review. Methodological Innovations, 15(1), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991221077910
82.
*TaylorA. J. (2019). Choice as an antecedent intervention provided to children with emotional disturbances [Doctoral dissertation, Bellarmine University]. Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Capstones.
83.
*TrussellR. P.ChenH. J.LewisT. J.LunaN. E. (2018). Reducing escape-maintained behavior through the application of classroom-wide practices and individually designed interventions. Education and Treatment of Children, 41(4), 507–532. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2018.0027
*VaughnB. J.HornerR. H. (1997). Identifying instructional tasks that occasion problem behaviors and assessing the effects of student versus teacher choice among these tasks. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30(2), 299–312. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1997.30-299
86.
ViechtbauerW. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
87.
*WarrenT.CaglianiR. R.WhitesideE.AyresK. M. (2019). Effect of task sequence and preference on on-task behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 30, 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-019-09358-1
88.
WehbyJ. H.LaneK. L. (2019). Classroom management. In LittleS. G.Akin-LittleA. (Eds.), Applying psychology in the schools book series. Behavioral interventions in schools: Evidence-based positive strategies (2nd ed., pp. 61–76). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000126-004
What Works Clearinghouse. (2020). What Works Clearinghouse standards handbook (Version 4.1). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/handbooks
91.
*WilliamsE. B. (1996). Effects of choice on the behavior of students with severe emotional disabilities of selecting peers and activity order (Publication No. 9541720) [Doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
92.
WinthropR.ShoukryY.NitkinD. (2025, January). The disengagement gap: Why student engagement isn’t what parents expect. Brookings. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED663848
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
