Technology in schools is abundant as is the call for evidence-based interventions for students who need additional support to be successful. One promising use of technology is for self-monitoring interventions aimed at improving classroom behavior. In this study, two middle school students with disabilities used a multicomponent, self-monitoring app on an iPad during their reading classes. Using a data-based individualization approach, teachers worked with the primary investigator to monitor students’ response to the intervention and adapt the intervention accordingly. A single-subject design was used to test the effects of the intervention, and a functional relation was established for both participants who improved their academic engagement and decreased their disruptive behavior. Additionally, participants indicated the intervention was socially valid. Limitations, implications, and future directions are discussed.
AyersK. M.MechlingL.SansostiF. J. (2013). The use of mobile technologies to assist with life skills/independence of students with moderate/severe intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorders: Considerations for the future of school psychology. Psychology in the Schools, 50, 259–271. doi:10.1002/pits.21673
2.
BedesemP. L. (2012). Using cell phone technology for self-monitoring procedures in inclusive settings. Journal of Special Education Technology, 27, 33–46.
3.
BriereD. E.SimonsenB. (2011). Self-monitoring interventions for at-risk middle school students: The importance of considering function. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 129–140.
4.
BrieschA. M.ChafouleasS. M. (2009). Review and analysis of literature on self-management interventions to promote appropriate classroom behaviors (1988-2008). School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 106–118. doi:10.1037/a0016159
5.
BruhnA. L.McDanielS.KreighC. (2015). Self-monitoring interventions for students with behavior problems: A review of current research. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 102–121.
6.
BruhnA. L.VoglegsangK.SchabilionK.WallerL.FernandoJ. F. (2015). I don’t like being good! Changing behavior with technology-based self-monitoring. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30, 133–144.
7.
ChafouleasS. M. (2011). Direct behavior rating: A review of the issues and research in its development. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 575–591. doi:10.1353/etc.2011.0034
8.
CooperJ. O.HeronT. E.HewardW. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
9.
CushingC. C.JensenC. D.SteeleR. G. (2010). An evaluation of a personal electronic device to enhance self-monitoring adherence in a pediatric weight management program using a multiple baseline design. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 36, 301–307. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsq074
10.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.VaughnS. (2014). What is intensive instruction and why is it important?Teaching Exceptional Children, 46, 13–18. doi:10.1177/0040059914522966
11.
GlasgowR. E.BullS. S.PietteJ. D.SteinerJ. F. (2004). Interactive behavior change technology: A partial solution to the competing demands of primary care. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 27, 80–87. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.04.026
12.
GoodmanR. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 1337–1345. doi:10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015
13.
GreshamF. M.ElliottS. N. (2008). Social Skills Improvement System–Rating Scale (SSIS-RS). Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
14.
GulchakD. J. (2008). Using a mobile handheld computer to teach a student with an emotional and behavioral disorder to self-monitor attention. Education and Treatment of Children, 31, 567–581.
15.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179.
JosephL. M.EveleighE. L. (2011). A review of the effects of self-monitoring on reading performance of students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 45, 43–53. doi:10.1177/022466909349145
18.
KernL.WehbyJ. H. (2014). Using data to intensify behavioral interventions for individual students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 46, 45–53. doi:10.1177/0040059914522970
19.
LockeE. A.LathamG. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35 year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717.
20.
MassellD. (2001). The theory and practice of using data to build capacity: State and local and their effects. In FuhrmanS. H. (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states (pp. 148–169). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
MechlingL. C. (2011). Review of twenty-first century portable electronic devices for persons with moderate intellectual disabilities and autism spectrum disorders. Education & Training in Autism & Developmental Disabilities, 46, 479–498.
22.
NicholsB. W.SingerK. P. (2000). Developing data mentors. Educational Leadership, 57, 34–37.
23.
NoldusL. P. J. J.TrienesR. J. H.HendriksenA. H. M.JansenH.JansenR. G. (2000). The observer video-pro: New software for the collection, management and presentation of time-structured data from videotapes and digital media files. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 197–206.
24.
ReynoldsC. R.KamphausR. W. (2004). Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC-2) (2nd ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.
25.
Scholastic Incorporated. (2005). READ 180. New York, NY: Author.
26.
Scholastic Incorporated. (2009). System 44. New York, NY: Author.
27.
SheffieldK.WallerR. J. (2010). A review of single-case studies utilizing self-monitoring interventions to reduce problem classroom behaviors. Beyond Behavior, 19, 7–13.
28.
SzwedK.BouckE. C. (2013). Clicking away: Repurposing student response systems to lesson off-task behavior. Journal of Special Education Technology, 28, 1–22.
29.
TateD. F.WingeR. R.WinettR. A. (2001). Using Internet technology to deliver a behavioral weight loss program. Journal of American Medical Association, 285, 1172–1177. doi:10.1001/jama.285.9.1172
30.
TherrienW. J.MathewsH. M.HirschS. E.SolisM. (2016). Progeny review: An alternative approach for examining the replication of intervention studies in special education. Remedial and Special Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0741932516646081
31.
VanDerHeydenA. M.BurnsM. K. (2010). Essentials of response to intervention. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
32.
WillsH. P.MasonB. A. (2014). Implementation of a self-monitoring application to improve on-task behavior: A high-school pilot study. Journal of Behavioral Education, 23, 421–434.
33.
WittJ. C.ElliotS. N. (1985a). Intervention rating profile-15: Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In KratochwillT. R. (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (pp. 251–288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
WittJ. C.ElliotS. N. (1985b). Children’s intervention rating profile: Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In KratochwillT. R. (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (p. 251). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
