Student Self-Monitoring

1. Student Self-Monitoring Applied Field Project By Amber Verrall

2. What is Student Self-Monitoring? Self-Monitoring is a “procedure that actively engages a student in observing and monitoring his or her behavior” (Smith & Nelson, 1997, p. 92) Self-Determination Self-Management Self-Monitoring

3. Self-Monitoring Looks Like… • Stringing beads to mark number of times student raised hand • Chart to record number of problems completed • Checklist to mark number of correct problems • Tally sheet to record how many times a behavior occurs • Happy face/Sad face chart to mark how often student is working on task Typically used to record • Time on task • Inappropriate/disruptive behavior • Accuracy/productivity

4. Who can Self-Monitoring Be Used With? • Gifted Students • Non-disabled students • At-risk students • Students with disabilities including: • Mild/Moderate Intellectual Disabilities • Developmental Delays • Autism • Behavior/Emotional Disturbance • Learning Disabilities • Speech Disorders • ADHD • Other disabilities All students!

5. My Big Idea • Assist students in developing ownership of their behaviors • Assist students in experiencing control over their intervention and behaviors • Increase respectful communication • Have a more peaceful classroom environment!

6. The Students • 9 students participated in the baseline phase (10 students participated in the intervention) • 6 boys and 3 girls participated, 2 students were second language learners • Students were from 7 to 10 years old, 1st to 5th grade • All students were diagnosed as having emotional disturbance • Other student disability labels include: ADHD, Language Disorders, various Learning Disabilities, Visual Impairment

7. The Plan • Students would self-monitor their use of respectful communicationusing a happy face, so-so face, or sad face • Students would compare their self-monitoring to the teacher’s monitoring, and earn classroom coins accordingly (happy faces=2 coins, so-so faces=1 coins, sad faces=0 coins) • Bonus coins were awarded when the student’s self-monitoring sheet matched the teachers’ sheet • Students would graph their incidents of positive communication at the end of the week

8. Before the Intervention • Baseline data collection showed that as a whole the students utilized positive communication about an average of 44% of the time

9. The Intervention • Positive Communication was broken into 3 parts: • Word Choice – the words you choose to say • Voice Tone – how you say the words • Body – what your body is doing while you say the words • Students were trained in the use of respectful communication and self-monitoring in many ways • Role-playing • Pretend simulations • Reflection on real incidents • More role-playing

10. During Intervention • In surveys and interviews, all students felt that the intervention helped them to see how their day was going • All students enjoyed the idea of earning things for their behavior • Most students initially expressed a belief that the self-monitoring would help them have a good day • Some students felt that it took too long to complete

11. The Data • As a whole, the classroom’s observed use of positive communication increased during intervention to an average of about 84% of the time • 3 students experienced a large improvement (more than 10%) • 4 students experienced a moderate improvement (less than 10%) • 2 students experienced a slight decrease • 1 student had no baseline • In the last round of interviews, many students felt that the intervention did not show them the progress they were making

12. The Results

13. More Results • Possible correlation between student attitude and their performance with the intervention • All students in the large improvement group initially or eventually expressed positive attitudes • Students who maintained consistently neutral attitudes or who changed their attitude from positive to neutral typically fell into the moderate improvement group • Of the students in the slight decrease group, 1 maintained a positive attitude and 1 student changed her attitude from positive to neutral

14. The Limitations • My bias • Students had some prior experience with self-monitoring (not systematic or trained very well) • 1 student started the classroom during intervention, no baseline was established, so he may have skewed results • School wide change in data monitoring forms between baseline and intervention types

15. Lingering Questions • How can a progress monitoring component be added so that students can see and understand the progress they are making? • How would setting their own goals and evaluating progress towards these goals effect students’ perceptions and performance?

16. Discussion What value would student self-monitoring have for your students? For you as the teacher? How could you implement student self-monitoring in your classroom? • Track IEP goals • Use of social skills • Reading scores • Math accuracy • Completed assignment • Track completed homework

17. Take Home Message

18. Take Home Message • Steps to Set Up a Self-Monitoring System • Identify an area that student need improvement • Take baseline data on the desired area of improvement • Meet with student & determine method for monitoring & incentive (if any) • Teach student how to independently monitor • Practice! Practice! Practice! • Start self-monitoring (keep eye on student) & reinforce student • Meet with student to check on progress • Begin to fade if needed Remember, the goal is for a student to self-monitor without use of the intervention!

19. The Resources Crawley, S. H., Lynch, P., & Vannest, K. (2006). The use of self-monitoring to reduce off-task behavior and cross-correlation examination of weekends and absences as an antecedent to off-task behavior. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 28(2), 29-48. Firman, K., B., Beare, P., & Loyd, R. (2002). Enhancing self-management in students with mental retardation: extrinsic versus intrinsic procedures. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(2), 163-171. Ganz, J. B. (2008). Self-monitoring across age and ability levels. Preventing School Failure, 53(1), 39-48. Jull, S. K. (2009). Student behavior self-monitoring enabling inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 13(5), 489-500. Peterson, L.D., Young, K.R., Salzberg, C.L., West, R.P., & Hill, M. (2006). Using self-management procedures to improve classroom social skills in multiple general education settings. Education & Treatment of Children, 29(1),1-21. Rafferty, L. A. (2010). Step-by-step: Teaching students to self-monitor. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 43(2), 50-58. Schoen, S.F., & Nolen, J. (2004). Action research decreasing acting-out behavior and increasing learning. TEACHING Exceptional Children. 37(1), 26-29. Smith, D. J. & Nelson, J. R.(1997). Goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation for students with disabilities. In Agran, M. (Ed.), Student Directed Learning: Teaching Self-Determination Skills(pp. 80-110). Pacific Grove, Ca: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Smith, D. J. & Young, K. R. (1992). The effect of a self-management procedure on the classroom and academic behavior of students with mild handicaps. School Psychology Review, 21(1), 59-72. Vanderbilt, A. A. (2005). Designed for teachers: How to implement self-monitoring in the classroom. Beyond Behavior, 15(1), 21-24. Zlomke, K. and Zlomke, L. (2003). Token economy plus self-monitoring to reduce disruptive classroom behaviors. Behavior Analyst Today, 4(2), 177-182.

20. Questions for Me?