This
is a review of a publication published by the Hammill Institute on
Disabilities. The publication is titled,
"Using Self Monitoring of Performance with Self-Graphing to Increase
Academic Productivity in Math," and was written by Jenny Wells, PhD,
Patricia Sheehey, PhD, and Michael Sheehey, MEd.
This
study focuses on an intervention to promote self regulation skills in students
who struggled to maintain focus and motivation in math class. Self regulation describes the ability to
monitor and change one's own behavior in response to the environment (Wells,
2017). Although most students learn how
to self regulate independently, some students may struggle to learn these
skills. Often, the students who struggle
with self regulation skills also have learning disabilities or struggle with
learning a skill at the same rate as their peers. Wells states that through
Response to Intervention framework, 10%-15% of the population of students
generally require additional supports and interventions within the general
education classroom to meet academic standards. The three major facets of self
regulation are being able to inhibit initial responses, resist distractions,
and persist through non-preferred tasks (Wells, 2017, p.57).
Wells
et al. describes a case study in which an elementary student with emotional
disabilities is having trouble staying on task and learning math concepts. The chosen strategy for intervention is to
focus on teaching the student self regulation skills rather than simply more
direct math instruction. The argument
for doing so is that by directly teaching self regulation skills, the student
would indirectly master the desired academic skill (Wells, 2017, p. 58).
To
teach self regulation skills, the teacher chose a self-monitoring activity in
which the student would learn to graph his own progress. This strategy allows for visual feedback that
increases intrinsic motivation (Wells, 2017, p. 58). It is recommended to use whatever level of
graphing is most appropriate for the student.
Younger students may need more scaffolding than older students who have
more independent graphing skills.
In
order for this strategy to work, the teacher must first identify the goal of
the student or what the target performance level is. In this case study, the teacher made a clear
and obtainable goal for the student, in which he would solve 20 single digit
addition and subtraction problems within 15 minutes without being prompted to
stay on task. It is also important to
identify a baseline or current performance level (Wells, 2017, p. 58).
The
next step in implementation is to decide on procedures. In this study, the procedures include the
length of time between cues, how to cue the students, how the student will
respond when cued, what the student will do at the end of the time interval,
and what type of graph the student will complete. This should also be organized into a clear
list that the student can follow and understand (Wells, 2017, p.58).
Next,
the teacher should prepare the student for the intervention. This step focuses on gaining student buy-in
to the intervention. It is important for
the student to understand why it is important and be able to relate to it in
some way. The teacher in this study
talked to the student about his competitiveness in outdoor games and how he can
be competitive in class as well (Wells, 2017, p. 61).
The
last step before implementing the intervention is to teach the student about
the procedures and how to graph their progress after each interval. The student should clearly understand what is
expected in order to be successfully and maintain motivation (Wells, 2017, p.
61).
Implementing
the intervention can begin after the previous steps have been completed. In this case, the teacher began by cuing the
student every 90 seconds. When cued, the
student drew a line under the last problem completed and then continued
working. Overtime, the teacher increased
the amount of time between cues, allowing the student to become more
independent at maintaining focus and demonstrating increased self regulation
skills. During the implementation
process, it is critically to give academic feedback to the student, acknowledging
the correct responses while helping him to correct his errors (Wells, 2017, p.
62).
In
order to maintain progress, the teacher met with the student weekly to discuss
the current progress with him. Although
incentives are not preferred, they are sometimes needed for students to
maintain motivation. Incentives should
be reasonable and non-monetary. Verbal praise should be given frequently and
helps to strengthen positive behaviors.
Once the student has maintained the target academic performance, it is
then time to adjust the time between cues until the student can completely
maintain focus for the full 15 minutes (Wells, 2017, p. 63)
In
conclusion, self graphing is a strategy that helps motivate struggling students
to increase their self regulation skills.
This intervention requires a lot of planning and preparation on the
teacher's part, however it can be adapted to any student at any level if there
is student buy in and clear expectations. Teaching a student to self monitor their own
progress not only increases self regulation skills, but also increases academic
performance (Wells, 2017, p. 63).
Implications
to my study:
I
very much like the idea of self monitoring through graphing and increases self
regulation skills of students who struggle in math. This article does a great job of identifying
that students in Tier 2 level instruction require additional interventions to
meet learning targets. In my study, I
want to incorporate self-graphing skills so that students can identify current
levels as well as growth in their learning goals. I have focused a lot on
growth mindset, and graphing one's progress is a great way to enable to
students to show and celebrate their growth.
I like the idea of incentives for those who meet their goals as well.
One
concern I have with the example in this study is that the targeted skill was
time based. I understand that the focus
of self-regulation required an element of time, however I do not want to put
time restrictions in my implementation procedures. My focus is increasing academic attitudes
towards math which takes time. I am not
worried about how many problems they can solve correctly in a matter of time.
Rather, I want to build confidence and awareness in my students.
References:
Evans, M., & Boucher, A. R. (2015). Optimizing the Power of
Choice: Supporting Student Autonomy to Foster Motivation and Engagement in
Learning. Mind, Brain, And
Education, (2), 87.
doi:10.1111/mbe.12073
No comments:
Post a Comment