2014
DOI: 10.19030/tlc.v11i4.8856
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact Of Tactile-Cued Self-Monitoring On Independent Biology Work For Secondary Students With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Abstract: Results from a multiple baseline with changing conditions design across high school students with

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 39 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The self-management category included 10 studies with eight independent research teams with 16 cases and 35 participants in strategies designed to teach students to observe, document, and self-regulate behavior. The studies evaluated the effects of (a) self-monitoring (Graham-Day et al, 2010;Harris et al, 2005;Shimabukuro et al, 1999) and technology-based self-monitoring (Wills & Mason, 2014) on on-task behavior; (b) self-management/peer monitoring (Davies & Witt, 2000), classwide self-management (Hoff & Ervin, 2013), and technology-based self-management (Wills & Mason, 2014) on problem behavior (i.e., disruptions, verbalizations); (c) self-monitoring (Harris et al, 2005;Mathes & Bender, 1997;Shimabukuro et al, 1999) and tactile-cued self-monitoring (Morrison et al, 2014) on task quality (productivity, task accuracy, and completion); and (d) selfmanagement (Gureasko-Moore et al, 2006 on classroom preparation and homework behavior.…”
Section: Self-managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The self-management category included 10 studies with eight independent research teams with 16 cases and 35 participants in strategies designed to teach students to observe, document, and self-regulate behavior. The studies evaluated the effects of (a) self-monitoring (Graham-Day et al, 2010;Harris et al, 2005;Shimabukuro et al, 1999) and technology-based self-monitoring (Wills & Mason, 2014) on on-task behavior; (b) self-management/peer monitoring (Davies & Witt, 2000), classwide self-management (Hoff & Ervin, 2013), and technology-based self-management (Wills & Mason, 2014) on problem behavior (i.e., disruptions, verbalizations); (c) self-monitoring (Harris et al, 2005;Mathes & Bender, 1997;Shimabukuro et al, 1999) and tactile-cued self-monitoring (Morrison et al, 2014) on task quality (productivity, task accuracy, and completion); and (d) selfmanagement (Gureasko-Moore et al, 2006 on classroom preparation and homework behavior.…”
Section: Self-managementmentioning
confidence: 99%