TY - JOUR
T1 - Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of performance
T2 - Replication and cross-task comparison studies
AU - Harris, Karen R.
AU - Graham, Steve
AU - Reid, Robert
AU - Mcelroy, Karen
AU - Hamby, Robin Stern
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1994/5
Y1 - 1994/5
N2 - The effectiveness of two self-monitoring interventions on the attentional and academic performance of students with learning disabilities was compared in two separate experiments. In the first experiment, a counterbalanced, multiple-baseline-across-subjects design was used to determine if attention and performance monitoring had differential effects on the spelling study behaviors of four students with learning disabilities. Both interventions had a positive impact on students' on-task behavior as well as the number of times they correctly practiced spelling words. Two of the students, however, were more productive when using self-monitoring of performance, and all the students preferred this self-monitoring procedure. In the second experiment, using the same design and procedures, the two self-monitoring interventions were applied to story writing. Both had a positive effect on the length and quality of students' stories as well as their on-task behavior during writing. Neither of the self-monitoring interventions, however, was clearly or consistently superior to the other. Recommendations for teachers regarding designing, implementing, and evaluating self-monitoring procedures are provided.
AB - The effectiveness of two self-monitoring interventions on the attentional and academic performance of students with learning disabilities was compared in two separate experiments. In the first experiment, a counterbalanced, multiple-baseline-across-subjects design was used to determine if attention and performance monitoring had differential effects on the spelling study behaviors of four students with learning disabilities. Both interventions had a positive impact on students' on-task behavior as well as the number of times they correctly practiced spelling words. Two of the students, however, were more productive when using self-monitoring of performance, and all the students preferred this self-monitoring procedure. In the second experiment, using the same design and procedures, the two self-monitoring interventions were applied to story writing. Both had a positive effect on the length and quality of students' stories as well as their on-task behavior during writing. Neither of the self-monitoring interventions, however, was clearly or consistently superior to the other. Recommendations for teachers regarding designing, implementing, and evaluating self-monitoring procedures are provided.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21344482626&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21344482626&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2307/1511182
DO - 10.2307/1511182
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:21344482626
SN - 0731-9487
VL - 17
SP - 121
EP - 139
JO - Learning Disability Quarterly
JF - Learning Disability Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -