Ensuring that all learners thrive within an inclusive education system requires intervention strategies that address both academic and behavioral challenges, particularly for Non-Graded Slow Readers who struggle without formal diagnoses or specialized support. Guided by this need, the present research evaluated the effectiveness of a positive reinforcement intervention in modifying behavior and enhancing reading development among two (2) Non-Graded Slow Readers in a Special Education Center, using teacher-made assessments, structured behavioral observations, and reading performance measures to compare outcomes before and after the intervention. Results revealed marked behavioral improvement, with aggressive behavior decreasing from a mean of 0.67 (Sometimes Aggressive) to 0.11 (Not Aggressive) and prosocial behavior increasing from 1.75 (Often Prosocial) to 2.00 (Often Prosocial), while reading development showed slight progress from a mean of 1.00 (Slow Reader) to 1.05 (Mostly Slow Reader). Teachers rated the intervention’s effectiveness very highly (mean = 5.83), and correlation analyses indicated a moderate negative relationship between child behavior and reading development before implementation, as well as a strong positive relationship between behavior improvement and perceived effectiveness. Consistent with Operant Conditioning principles, the findings confirm that reinforcing desirable behavior reduced aggressive responses and stabilized prosocial actions, demonstrating that rewarded behaviors are more likely to recur. The gradual improvement in reading development suggests that better behavior can create conditions more conducive to academic engagement, and stakeholders recognized meaningful changes in the learners’ conduct and responsiveness, reinforcing the quantitative results. These outcomes demonstrate that positive reinforcement is an effective strategy for shaping adaptive behavior patterns and supporting emerging academic readiness among Non-Graded Slow Readers, highlighting its value within inclusive educational environments.
Omandam et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: