Increasing On-Task Behavior in Students in a Regular Classroom: Effectiveness of a Self-Management Procedure Using a Tactile Prompt
- 2.4k Downloads
Self-management strategies have been shown to be widely effective. However, limited classroom-based research exists involving low performing but developmentally normal high school-aged participants. This study examined the effectiveness of a self-management strategy aimed at increasing on-task behavior in general education classrooms with students without a diagnosed disability, behavior disorder, or exceptionality. The self-management package included provision of a tactile prompt, training in self-monitoring and data recording, self-monitoring, and the plotting of the results on a cumulative graph. A multiple baseline design across three participants was used to evaluate the effects of the intervention. An increase in on-task behavior was observed with all participants on implementation of the self-management package, and questionnaire-based social validity findings suggest this was an acceptable and effective procedure for the classroom context. Limitations, implications, and future directions of these findings are discussed.
KeywordsAdolescent students Self-management Self-monitoring Tactile prompt On-task behavior Classroom
- Axelrod, M., Zhe, E., Haugen, K., & Klein, J. (2009). Self-management on on-task homework behavior: A promising strategy for adolescents with attention and behavior problems. School Psychology Review, 38, 325–333.Google Scholar
- Kazdin, A. (2010). Single case research designs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Moore, D. W., Prebble, S., Robertson, J., Waetford, R., & Anderson, A. (2001). Self-recording with goal setting: A self-management programme for the classroom. Educational Psychology, 21, 255–259.Google Scholar
- O’Reilly, M., Tiernan, R., Lancioni, G., Lacey, C., Hillery, J., & Gardner, M. (2002). Use of self-monitoring and delayed feedback to increase on-task behavior in a post-institutionalized child within regular classroom settings. Education and Treatment of Children, 25, 91–102.Google Scholar