2017
DOI: 10.1002/pits.22031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using iPad tablets for self-modeling with preschoolers: Videos versus photos

Abstract: As technology becomes more accessible and acceptable in the preschool setting, teachers need effective strategies of incorporating it to address challenging behaviors. A nonconcurrent delayed multiple baseline design in combination with an alternating treatment design was utilized to investigate the effects of using iPad tablets to display video self-modeling and activity photos for three preschoolers during circle time. During baseline, all three children demonstrated low levels of engagement and high levels … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, regardless of the applications or programs used with mobile technology, the interventions in the selected studies showed positive results overall. Whether the interventions used either specific self‐monitoring application (e.g., Romans et al, 2020; Rosenbloom et al, 2019) or used mobile technology to encourage students to self‐regulate their behaviors (e.g., McCoy et al, 2017), it seems reasonable to conclude that the interventions allowed the students to acknowledge and self‐assess their own behaviors. Second, the portability of mobile technology (e.g., iPad, iPod, or a handheld computer in early 2000s) made it possible for students to use the technology frequently.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, regardless of the applications or programs used with mobile technology, the interventions in the selected studies showed positive results overall. Whether the interventions used either specific self‐monitoring application (e.g., Romans et al, 2020; Rosenbloom et al, 2019) or used mobile technology to encourage students to self‐regulate their behaviors (e.g., McCoy et al, 2017), it seems reasonable to conclude that the interventions allowed the students to acknowledge and self‐assess their own behaviors. Second, the portability of mobile technology (e.g., iPad, iPod, or a handheld computer in early 2000s) made it possible for students to use the technology frequently.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One study reported including students “at risk” for mathematics difficulty (Desoete & Praet, 2013 ). Finally, five studies reported that they did not include students with disabilities (Dennis et al, 2016 ; Maureen et al, 2018 ; McCoy et al, 2017 ; Oades-Sese et al, 2021 ; Simsek & Isikoglu Erdogan, 2021 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One study showed varying results across control and intervention groups, meaning that one group performed higher on certain skills than the other and vice-versa (Elimelech & Aram, 2020 ). For the included studies that employed a single-case research design, the results were mixed as well with most studies reporting an increase in target academic skills (Boyle et al, 2021 ; Chai, 2017 ; Musti-Rao et al, 2015 ), programming skills (Taylor, 2018 ), and engagement (McCoy et al, 2017 ) or social skills (Dueñas et al, 2021 ; Jung & Sainato, 2015 ; Pellegrino et al, 2020 ), while a few reported no clear, functional relation between the intervention and dependent variable (Cardon et al, 2019 ; Dennis et al, 2016 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Across studies, 48.0% ( n = 12) used a self-developed questionnaire, 12.0% ( n = 3) used a self-developed questionnaire with open-ended questions, 12.0% used a questionnaire with author modification of validated scale, 24.0% ( n = 6) used a questionnaire with validated scale, and 4.0% ( n = 1) used only open-ended questions without rating scale items (Brock & Beaman-Diglia, 2018). Six studies (21.4%) conducted an interview (Bailey & Blair, 2015; Blair, Fox, & Lentini, 2010; Fettig, Barton, Carter, & Eisenhower, 2016; Hancock, Kaiser, & Delaney, 2002; McCoy, Morrison, Barnett, Kalra, & Donovan, 2017; Park & Scott, 2009). Some researchers used objective measures such as: masked ratings (using videos with masked observers) or a normative comparison.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%