Running Head: SELF-MANAGEMENT 1

Self-Management

Sabrina Bogosian

Franciscan University of Steubenville

EDU 348

Spring 2018
SELF-MANAGEMENT 2

Self-Management

Teachers have long reported concerns about student behavior (Busacca, Anderson, &

Moore, 2015). Problem behavior when moderated by external agents, such as promptings from

the general education (GE) teacher, the special education teacher, or a paraeducator, can be

problematic for students, particularly those with disabilities in the GE setting (McDougall,

Skouge, Farrell, & Hoff, 2006). Teachers and other staff, who often become the external agents

in modifying problem behavior, may also face some challenges. These behaviors can disrupt the

learning processes and increase the risk of teacher stress, emotional exhaustion, and burnout

(Busacca et al., 2015). Teacher-based interventions that attempt to remediate these problem

behaviors put high demands on teachers’ time and effort, leaving less time for invaluable

instruction (Gureasko-Moore, DuPaul, & White, 2006).

Researchers and practitioners have noted the promise of self-management strategies,

particularly for students with disabilities and their teachers (McDougall, 1998). Self-management

offers a relatively unobtrusive, economical, and practical means of allowing students to move

toward independence while empowering them to take an active role in the improvement of their

behavior and academics (Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013). Self-management strategies, by

alleviating some of the pressure placed on teachers to manage problem behaviors, may allow for

more time to plan instruction, design learning environments, and carry out instruction

(McDougall et al., 2006).

Definition of Self-Management

Self-management involves a series of interventions designed to guide learners in

practicing self-control (Shea & Bauer, 2012). In this process, the learner applies behavior change

techniques or actions to modify his or her own behavior (Busacca et al., 2015). The intention is
SELF-MANAGEMENT 3

that by using these strategies, learners will become increasingly aware of their own cognitive

processes and knowledge and how those processes influence academics and behavior (Shea &

Bauer, 2012). McConnel (1999) noted that self-management, for the student, essentially has

three phases. In the first phase, the student asks him or herself if he or she was exhibiting the

behavior targeted for modification, for example, time on task. In the second phase, the student

records the answer. Then, in the third phase, the student returns to the task.

Types of self-management strategies include self-monitoring, goal setting, self-

instruction, self-graphing, self-evaluation, and self-reinforcement. These strategies can be used in

independently of one another, but they are often used in conjunction (Schulze, 2016). Self-

monitoring encompasses self-observation and self-recording, and involves students

systematically observing their own behavior and recording occurrences or non-occurrences of a

particular behavior that is being targeted for modification (Busacca et al., 2015). Goal setting

entails having the student choose a particular behavior to change (Schulze, 2016). The self-

instruction strategy involves the student verbalizing the steps of a task, or series of tasks, that he

or she needs to complete, either out loud or to him or herself (Schulze, 2016). Self-graphing

entails having a student graph his or her behavior on a regular basis so that he or she may

visually monitor progress on his or her behaviors (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009; Sutherland &

Snyder, 2011). Self-evaluation involves the students evaluating his or her own behavior against a

set standard (Busacca et al., 2015). Self-reinforcement involves the delivery of an earned reward

dependent upon performing the target behavior or meeting a set goal (Busacca et al., 2015).

Note that self-management is not something that a student is expected to accomplish

completely on his or her own. McConnell (1999) suggested a series of nine-steps to implement

self-management, which in essence states: A target behavior that has a significant impact on the
SELF-MANAGEMENT 4

student’s functioning should be identified and defined; baseline data should be collected; private

and positive student-teacher conferences should be conducted; the self-management procedure to

be applied should be specified and described; the student should be instructed on the intervention

and allowed time to practice; the intervention should be implemented; the student’s

implementation should be monitored and modified, if necessary; and a follow-up should be

conducted to ensure that the behavior is being maintained. An adult should always be involved in

the implementation of the intervention. For students, self-management strategies offer a means to

modify problematic behavior without reliance on external agents, to encourage student

independence and responsibility, and to helps students meet teacher expectations (McDougall et

al., 2006).

Review of Literature

The Various Applications of Self-Monitoring

Self-monitoring, the most commonly researched form of self-management has

applications for the GE setting (McDougall et al., 2006). With the normalization of inclusion and

the implementation of the least restrictive environment mandate, an increasing number of

students with disabilities are served in GE classrooms (McDougall, 1998; US Department of

Education, 2016). This means that students with various disabilities are being served in settings

where disruptions may not be tolerated and the ability to function independently is expected (Xu,

Wang, Lee, & Luke, 2016). Students need an intervention that makes use of already available

resources, allows for selective and portable implementation, and mitigates any potential stigma

that may be associated with obtrusive interventions (Clemons, Mason, Garrison-Kane, & Wills,

2016). Research has shown positive behavior change as result of self-monitoring for students

with a wide range of disabilities in various settings (Xu et al., 2016).

SELF-MANAGEMENT 5

Clemons et al. (2016), in assessing the effects of the I-Connect self-monitoring

application on the on-task behavior of three high school students with varying disability

categories, found self-monitoring to be effective in both the GE setting and the self-contained

setting (Clemons et al., 2016). Data suggested that the use of self-monitoring application resulted

in improved on-task behavior for all three participants, despite differences in categorical

disability and instructional setting (Clemons et al., 2016). Additionally, the indirect rating of

academic performance and social validity gathered from the participants and their teachers

supported the use of the intervention (Clemons et al., 2016). The findings of Clemons et al.

(2016) provide support for self-monitoring as an intervention that has applications for individuals

with disabilities despite differences in disability category and instructional setting.

Falkenberg and Barbetta (2013), in assessing the effects of a self-monitoring intervention

package on the homework completion and accuracy rates of four elementary schools students

with varying disabilities, found the self-monitoring intervention to improve the completion and

accuracy of spelling and math homework for students with disabilities in the GE setting.

Although it should be noted since one of the participants began with a 100% baseline completion

rate in math homework, his completion rate could not improve because of ceiling effect

(Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013). Additionally, maintenance data showed that all participants’

performance continually remained above their baseline levels succeeding the intervention

(Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013).

Self-Management and Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Self-management strategies can be useful for students with ASD. Students with ASD

often struggle with deficits in maintaining attention, composing responses, setting and pursuing

goals, and planning (Schulze, 2016). Without appropriate support, students with ASD may
SELF-MANAGEMENT 6

frequently display disruptive behavior in the classroom and have difficulty focusing on academic

tasks (Xu et al., 2017). These kinds of disruptive behaviors can interfere with the teaching and

learning process, and can increase the risk of teacher stress, emotional exhaustion, and burnout

(Busacca et al., 2015). Self-management procedures have been used effectively with students

with ASD to improve academic, social, and other classroom behaviors (Schulze, 2016).

Xu et al. (2017) found that an intervention package composed of guided goal setting and

self-monitoring played a part in improving the academic engagement behavior of a student with

ASD in an inclusive classroom in China. The researchers utilized an unobtrusive auditory device

to prompt the child to engage in the self-management intervention at one-minute intervals for 30

minutes (Xu et al., 2017). When the child was successful in meeting the predetermined criterion

of performance, he received a self-selected reinforcer (Xu et al., 2017). These results provide

support for the use of self-management interventions for the improvement of the academic

engagement of students with ASD.

Koegel, Park, and Koegel (2013) examined the effects of self-management intervention

on sustained reciprocal conversation, maintenance of treatment gains, generalization of treatment

gains to new conversational partners, and whether the treatment resulted in socially significant

improvements in the participants’ social conversations. Participants included two children and

one adolescent with ASD (Koegel et al., 2013). The researchers found that the treatment resulted

in increases in elaborated responses and reciprocal question asking during conversation (Koegel

et al., 2013). Additionally, researchers found that the self-management intervention resulted in

improved ratings of conversational competence (reciprocity, interest, and naturalness) by naive

observers (Koegel et al., 2013). These results provide support for the use of self-management to

improve the communication skills of students with ASD.

SELF-MANAGEMENT 7

Implications for Practice

Review of the literature suggests several implications for the use of self-management

strategies. One such implication is the efficacy of self-monitoring as an intervention. The

literature reveals that self-monitoring is well supported by empirical research (McDougall et al.,

2006). Research indicates that it is effective when implemented in conjunction with other self-

management strategies, such as goal setting or self-reinforcement (Koegel et al., 2014; Xu et al.,

2017). Moreover, it is versatile in that it has been shown to be effective for students with

disabilities in both the GE and self-contained settings, despite disability category (Clemons et al.,

2016). Therefore, practitioners should feel confident about using self-monitoring strategies with

students regardless of their particular disabilities or instructional setting.

Secondly, the research reveals that self-management strategies can be effective in

improving a variety of behaviors. The research, focusing on target behaviors such as

organization skills, homework completion and accuracy, and conversation skills, reveals that

self-management can be effective in modifying both academic and social behavior (Gureasko-

Moore et al., 2006; Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013; Koegel et al., 2014). Moreover, it should be

noted that the literature primarily focuses on the promotion certain desirable behaviors, as

opposed to the mitigation of those that are undesirable (Clemons et al., 2016; Falkenberg &

Barbetta, 2013; Xu et al., 2017). Thus, practitioners should utilize self-management strategies to

increase various positive behaviors in their students.

Finally, the literature base implies that technology may be a helpful tool for

implementing self-management strategies for students with disabilities in the GE setting. When

employing a self-management intervention, prompting mechanisms are often used to cue

students to check in on their behavior. However, some obtrusive prompting mechanisms, such as
SELF-MANAGEMENT 8

beeping timers or verbal promptings from a paraeducator, may pose a distraction for other

students and the classroom teacher in addition to posing possible stigmatization, especially in an

inclusive classroom. Developments in technology may allow for more subtle forms of prompting

and decrease any distraction or potential stigmatization associated with more overt mechanisms

(Clemons et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2017). Practitioners should take advantage of developments in

technology and employ subtle prompting systems in inclusive classrooms.

Implications for Future Research

Much of the literature in existence about self-management utilize an intervention

package, often involving self-monitoring (Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013; Gureasko-Moore et al.,

2006; Koegel et al., 2014; Xu et al., 2017). However, there seems to be a lack of empirical

research about the effectiveness of the other types of self-management, for example, self-

graphing or goal setting, as they function in isolation. Further research needs to be done to

investigate the effectiveness of each of these types, in order to provide practitioners with a firm

understanding of which of these strategies is most effective, with whom, and in which settings.

Additionally, more research ought to be done about how the gains made as a result of

self-management interventions are generalized to other settings. Much of the literature focuses

on the results of using self-management interventions in one particular setting (Gureasko-Moore

et al., 2006; Koegel et al., 2014; Xu et al., 2017). Some of the literature even examines the

maintenance of treatment gains over time (Clemons et al., 2016; Falkenberg & Barbetta, 2013).

However, there seems to be a lack of research on how treatment gains are generalized to other

settings. Studies that examine the generalization of treatment gains would be helpful in knowing

whether self-management skills need to be taught in each setting or if they can be taught in just

one.
SELF-MANAGEMENT 9

Conclusion

Teachers may face problematic classroom behavior, which can place demands on their

already limited time and energy. Self-management strategies offer an effective means of

modifying behaviors, particularly the behaviors of students with disabilities, in a way that

encourages student independence and personal responsibility. These strategies, having been

shown to be successful for students with disabilities in both the GE and self-contained setting,

should be utilized. Professionals in the field should keep in mind the efficacy of self-monitoring;

the versatility of self-management strategies in increasing positive behaviors; and the effective

role that technology can play in implementing self-management interventions. Doing so is

critical to creating productive learning environments in which teachers have the time to plan and

implement quality instruction and students with disabilities have the opportunity to participate

fully in the learning process with their peers.

SELF-MANAGEMENT 10

References

Briesch, A. M., & Chafouleas, S. M. (2009). Review and analysis of literature on self-

management interventions to promote appropriate classroom behaviors (1988–2008).

School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 106–118.

Busacca, M. L., Anderson, A., & Moore, D. W. (2015). Self-management for primary

school students demonstrating problem behavior in regular classrooms: Evidence review

of single-case design research. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(4), 373-401.

Clemons, L. L., Mason, B. A., Garrison-Kane, L., & Wills, H. P. (2016). Self-monitoring

for high school students with disabilities: A cross-categorical investigation of I-Connect.

Journal Of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(3), 145-155.

Falkenberg C, Barbetta P. The effects of a self-monitoring package on homework

completion and accuracy of students with disabilities in an inclusive general education

classroom. Journal Of Behavioral Education [serial online]. September 1, 2013;

22(3):190-210.

Gureasko-Moore, S., DuPaul, G. J., & White, G. P. (2006). The effects of self-

management in general education classrooms on the organizational skills of adolescents

with ADHD. Behavior Modification, 30(2), 159-183.

Koegel, L. K., Park, M. N., & Koegel, R. L. (2014). Using self-management to improve

the reciprocal social conversation of children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal Of

Autism And Developmental Disorders, 44(5), 1055-1063.

McConnel, M. E (1999). Self-monitoring, cueing, recording, and management:

Teaching students to manage their own behavior. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(2),

14-21.
SELF-MANAGEMENT 11

McDougall, D. (1998). Research on self-management techniques used by students

with disabilities in general education settings: A descriptive review. Remedial And

Special Education, 19(5), 310-20.

McDougall, D., Skouge, J., Farrell, A., & Hoff, K. (2006). Research on self-management

techniques used by students with disabilities in general education settings: A promise

fulfilled?. Journal Of The American Academy Of Special Education Professionals, 36-73.

Shea, T. M., & Bauer, A. M. (2012). Behavior management: a practical approach for

educators (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Schulze, M. A. (2016). Self-management strategies to support students with ASD.

TEACHING Exceptional Children, 48(5), 225-231.

Sutherland, K. S., & Snyder, A. (2007). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and self-

graphing on reading fluency and classroom behavior of middle school students with

emotional or behavioral disorders. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15,

103–118.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). The Digest of

Education Statistics, 2015 (NCES 2016-014), Table 204.60.

Xu, S., Wang, J., Lee, G. T., & Luke, N. (2017). Using self-monitoring with guided goal

setting to increase academic engagement for a student with autism in an inclusive

classroom in China. Journal Of Special Education, 51(2), 106-114.