An evaluation of the effectiveness of teacher- vs. student-management classroom interventions

Fantuzzo, John W.; Polite, Kenneth; Cook, David M.; Quinn, G.

doi:10.1002/1520-6807(198804)25:2<154::aid-pits2310250209>3.0.co;2-m

Cited by 36 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The absence of moderation effects in the current study supports prior work that has suggested self-management is equally effective for many students (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009;Fantuzzo et al, 1988). It should be noted that the potential to detect moderating effects are often limited by sample size.…”

Section: Discussion and Applications To Social Worksupporting

confidence: 83%

“…Regarding the consistency with which researchers implement self-management, two reviews conducted a component analysis of over 90 studies and suggested, on average, students were only engaged in 38% to 68% of the self-management elements-of which self-monitoring is the most often used (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009;Fantuzzo et al, 1988). Upon closer examination, however, Briesch and Chafouleas noted that only 5 of the 11 elements frequently appeared across self-management studies: self-identifying a target behavior, self-defining the target behavior, self-observing one's own behavior, self-recording the observations, and self-evaluating performance (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009;Maggin et al, 2013).…”

Section: Features Of Effective School-based Supportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Randomized Trial of the Self-Management Training and Regulation Strategy for Disruptive Students

Thompson

2013

Research on Social Work Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The study examined the effects of the Self-Management Training and Regulation Strategy (STARS) on disruptive behavior, authority acceptance, social competency, and student-teacher relations. Method: All fourth-and fifth-grade students (N ¼ 762) in seven schools and 42 classrooms were screened for disruptive behaviors. Using a cluster randomized design, 60 students in 23 classrooms and 48 students in 19 classrooms with highest levels of disruptive classroom behaviors were randomized to STARS or a control comparison condition. Multilevel models compared study conditions on all outcomes. Results: Study conditions were balanced at pretest. STARS students demonstrated improved teacher-rated disruptive behavior, social competence, authority acceptance, and relations. Conclusions: Selective programs targeting autonomy support improve social competencies and relationships that are important for school success.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Applications To Social Worksupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Features Of Effective School-based Supportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Randomized Trial of the Self-Management Training and Regulation Strategy for Disruptive Students

Thompson

2013

Research on Social Work Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• They are typically less invasive than teacher-managed strategies (Fantuzzo, Polite, Cook, & Quinn, 1988). …”

Section: Self-management Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Step-by-Step: Teaching Students to Self-Monitor

Rafferty¹

2010

TEACHING Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mr. Payton silently sat back in his chair and looked out at his students, who were supposed to be independently working on various projects. He noticed-and not for the first timethat a number of his students were unable to manage their own behavior and work independently of adult supervision. Mr. Payton felt overwhelmed because he was unable to constantly monitor and regulate all of his students' behaviors, especially given that their needs were so diverse.Some of his students required constant prompting to remain on-task. Others needed prompting to work with their partners when they were instructed to do so, whereas a few needed reminding to work alone during designated times. In addition, a number of students needed their academic work monitored.Mr. Payton knew that it is humanly impossible to continuously monitor all of his students' behaviors. Consequently, he set out to find a type of strategy that he could use to help his students manage their own behaviors. It was during his research that Mr. Payton stumbled upon a group of self-management interventions called "self-monitoring." 50 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

show abstract

“…Use of selfmanagement or self-reinforcement strategies should further reduce resources required for implementation. Further, school-based research has found these strategies to be more effective with greater generalization than teacher-managed interventions (e.g., Fantuzzo et al 1988) where greater student involvement corresponded with larger intervention effects (Fantuzzo and Polite 1990).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Best Practices in Utilizing the Changing Criterion Design

Klein

Houlihan

Vincent

et al. 2015

Behav Analysis Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The changing criterion design (CCD) has been a recognized format of single-case research for four decades. Published examples of the CCD have been limited and the structure of the design used in the literature has varied to a degree that might engender confusion. This review examines the structure of CCD studies published to date to identify prior implementation practices and identify best practices for future use.Keywords Single-case . Changing criterion design . Best practicesThe changing criterion design (CCD) utilizes step-wise benchmarks for manipulating a dimension (i.e., accuracy, frequency, duration, latency, or magnitude) of a single behavior already present in an individual's repertoire (Cooper et al. 2007). The design has been used with behaviors where an immediate, considerable increase or decrease may be difficult to achieve or undesired; therefore, gradual shifts toward a desired goal are applied.The CCD was first described in two books published in 1971: one a short description in a book by Hall, and the other a brief study reported by Weis and Hall which used the design to reduce daily cigarette smoking by a college student. A few subsequent studies utilized this design (i.e., Brown et al. 1974;Wallace and Davis 1974) prior to the seminal article by Hartmann and Hall (1976), which described the CCD in more detail and noted its similarity to a procedural description by Sidman (1960, pp. 254-256) in reference to the evaluation of irreversible behavior. Hartmann and Hall saw the CCD as a type of multiple baseline design that could be used with a shaping procedure. In response to the CCD as a multiple baseline design, Cooper et al. (2007) point out that the behavior being evaluated in a CCD is intentionally interdependent (unlike a multiple baseline design) which can lead to an exaggerated perception of experimental control. Conceptualizing this as an extension of the multiple baseline design adds confusion. Consequently, the CCD is best suited for the acceleration and deceleration of a behavior, but is versatile in the behaviors and populations it can be applied to. Despite this, the CCD has only rarely been mentioned as a research or intervention tool since Hartmann and Hall's article.Though not as experimentally robust as other designs (e.g., the multiple baseline design, which demonstrates experimental control through staggered, independent baselines), the CCD does achieve acceptable control through baseline logic and appropriate manipulation of design structure (see Table 1 for a simplified presentation of baseline logic of the CCD). With the CCD, a baseline serves as a measurement between the absence and presence of the independent variable, as do each criterion and its subsequent criterion. Therefore, when stable responding occurs at each step, (1) predictions about future responding can be made with each criterion, and (2) replications of intervention effect are observed repeatedly. Verification can be accomplished by varying the phase length or by reverting briefly to a previous cr...

show abstract

An evaluation of the effectiveness of teacher- vs. student-management classroom interventions

Cited by 36 publications

References 31 publications

A Randomized Trial of the Self-Management Training and Regulation Strategy for Disruptive Students

A Randomized Trial of the Self-Management Training and Regulation Strategy for Disruptive Students

Step-by-Step: Teaching Students to Self-Monitor

Best Practices in Utilizing the Changing Criterion Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About