Self-Monitoring and at-Risk Middle School Students

Abstract

Using a multiple baseline design across six academic settings, we found that teaching 4 at-risk middle school students to self-monitor markedly improved their academic performance as measured by their grades and related academic behaviors. Furthermore, these improvements generalized to settings where self-monitoring was never introduced, and they maintained the following school year. In this charter middle school setting, self-monitoring proved to be an extremely effective intervention. These findings suggest that it would be equally effective in a variety of settings.

Using Self‐management Interventions to Address General Education Behavioral Needs: Assessment of Effectiveness and Feasibility

“…Within the broader literature the most commonly utilized intervention configuration has been found to involve basic self-monitoring (i.e., prompting, observing, and recording) without the addition of goal setting, evaluation, reinforcement, or monitoring (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009a). This basic configuration has repeatedly been shown to be effective (e.g., Levendoski & Cartledge, 2000;Prater, Hogan, & Miller, 1992), and effect sizes identified in studies of at-risk students were found to be particularly high (3.73, Wood et al, 2002;7.09, Wood et al, 1998). Such an intervention configuration certainly requires less coordination and management than what was implemented in the current investigation.…”

“…In the Wood et al. () study, for example, self‐monitoring sheets were placed on the students’ desks prior to the start of each class, such that students were not responsible for these materials. Further, in the Wood et al.…”

“…Although teacher involvement in the intervention was designed to be minimal (i.e., meeting with the lead researcher once a week to address any relevant concerns), the high level of implementation scaffolding provided by researchers in both studies serves to limit the external validity of these findings. In the Wood et al (1998) study, for example, self-monitoring sheets were placed on the students' desks prior to the start of each class, such that students were not responsible for these materials. Further, in the Wood et al (2002) study, the lead researcher was present in the classroom on a daily basis to ensure that procedures were implemented consistently.…”

“…In the Wood et al (1998) study, for example, self-monitoring sheets were placed on the students' desks prior to the start of each class, such that students were not responsible for these materials. Further, in the Wood et al (2002) study, the lead researcher was present in the classroom on a daily basis to ensure that procedures were implemented consistently. This individual's presence likely ensured high levels of integrity and served to influence the students' behavior as well.…”

Effects of Planning and Goal Setting on Reducing Latency to Task Engagement for Struggling Readers in Middle School

“…Students who repeatedly exhibit non-compliance or excessive delays in engagement are at risk for spending less time engaged in academic tasks (Good and Beckerman 1978;Maag and Anderson 2007). Copious research has established a positive relationship between academic engagement and student achievement (Carini et al 2006;Codding and Smyth 2008;Fredricks et al 2004;Good and Beckerman 1978;Greenwood et al 2002;Kuh 2009;Marks 2000;National Research Council 2004;Wood et al 2002). Specifically among struggling learners, increased academic engagement is closely associated with increases in academic achievement (Carini et al 2006).…”