example, conducted two studies on the school behavior adjustment status of two groups of boys: an antisocial group who had already exhibited antisocial behavior both at school and at home (n = 39) and an at-risk control group (n = 41).
In the first study, Walker et. al (1990) compared the groups on a series of behavioral measures across Grades 5, 6, and 7. Measures included (1) teacher ratings of each student's social skills, (2) classroom observations, (3) playground observations, and (4) school archival records. Results indicated extremely problematic behavioral profiles for the antisocial group and much more favorable profiles for the at- risk controls. It was observed that the behavior profiles for the groups appeared to be quite consistent and stable across the middle school years.
In the second study, Walker, Steiber and O'Neill (1990) used a series of selected fifth-grade variables, derived from the four major clusters of study measures, as predictors in regression analyses of students' status of seventh grade criterion measures of school success or failure. The criterion measures predicted were (1) reading and math achievement, (2) school discipline contacts, (3) attendance, and (4) time spent within a nonregular classroom. Classroom and playground observations, social skills and school records of misbehavior were all found to be predictive of criterion measures.
There has been a good deal of research attempting to explain the origins of misbehavior in school. In this regard, Snyder, Schrepferman and St. Peter (1997) tested theoretical models specifying the contribution of two social-familial mechanisms, negative reinforcement and affect dysregulation (inability to control emotions, impulsivity), to the development of child antisocial behavior in school. Sample subjects consisted of six through thirteen year old boys (N = 57) referred for treatment of conduct problems and their families.
Results were ...