 |
||||
 |
||||
|
||||
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
| Summary of Self-Management Research
The purpose of this literature review
was to determine the effectiveness of self-management
as an intervention
for students with emotional and behavioral disorders
(EBD). Areas of effectiveness that were evaluated
included: (a) age/grade, (b) diagnosis, in addition
to EBD, (c) racial/cultural background, (d) setting,
(e) targeted behavior, (f) duration of evaluation,
(g) procedural integrity, (h) consumer satisfaction,
(i) link to assessment information, and (j) generalization.
Below is a description of the findings. |
There were four types of settings targeted in the studies (with a total of 48 different settings): special education classrooms (65%), general education classrooms (19%), residential treatment facilities (6%), and the students’ homes (6%). Academic subjects that were targeted included Math classes (24%), English/ language arts (14%), reading (7%), handwriting (2%), social studies (5%), and science (5%) Out of 56 total target behaviors, 38% were task engagement and 29% inappropriate/appropriate behaviors. Academic accuracy (14%) and productivity (9%) were also dependent variables. Other target behaviors were assignment neatness, latency to complete an assignment, appropriate responses to instruction, self-perceived competence and self-concept, transition time between classes, and time spent out of class. To date, in-depth analyses of twenty articles have been conducted. The following information includes data from these analyses. Effectiveness was assessed in three ways: effect sizes, percentage of non-overlapping data points, and percentage change in level. The indicators for all studies demonstrated improvement in the target behaviors. For task engagement, the mean effect size was 1.93 (range of .54-4.50). The mean effect size for inappropriate/appropriate behavior was 1.80 (range of 1.29-2.34). Academic accuracy mean effect size was 4.13 (range of .20-34.12); the mean effect size for academic productivity was 3.03 (range of .80-8.70). The mean percentage of non-overlapping data points for task engagement was 78%, for inappropriate/appropriate behaviors 38%, for academic accuracy 48%, and for academic productivity 55%. The mean percentage change in level for all behaviors was large (above 75%). The range for percentage change in level for task engagement, academic accuracy and productivity extended from small (less than 25%) to large (greater than 75%), Appropriate and inappropriate behaviors displayed a moderate (26%-75%) to large (greater than 75%) range in percentage change in level. The duration of time across which self-management procedures were assessed ranged from 3 to 25 weeks, when a time period was specified, and 5 to 34 sessions when time frames were not provided. Maintenance was measured in 35% of the coded studies. The range of the maintenance period was one week to three years. Overall, the behaviors maintained. In 25% of studies, treatment fidelity was assessed; however, one of the four studies did so informally, with no formal data collection procedures reported. Of the remaining three studies, treatment fidelity ranged from 30% to 100%. Treatment acceptability was assessed in 30% of the coded studies. Two studies reported anecdotal reports of positive opinions of the intervention procedures by teachers and parents. The remaining studies used formal questions and rating scales to measure treatment acceptability according to teachers, parents, and students. In general, these groups responded positively to the self-management procedures, reporting that they required little effort and that they would choose to use the intervention again. Social validity was ascertained in 25% of the coded studies. Only two studies used formal measures of social validity. Teachers and parents, overall, reported a positive change in the student’s behavior. Functional assessments were conducted in only 15% of the coded studies. The functional assessment procedures included functional assessment interviews, direct observations, functional analysis, hypothesis development and testing, and linking to intervention. Spontaneous generalization was assessed in 1 (5%) of the studies. In this study, there was generalization to other behaviors (e.g., task engagement improved when the student was only self-monitoring disruptive behavior). In summary, self-management appears to be effective with students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders ranging from elementary through high school. Racial/cultural background was often not provided in the description of the participants, and therefore, information about the effectiveness of self-management across students of varying backgrounds is lacking. The most targeted settings were special education classrooms. General education classrooms were included, though in limited numbers. Dependent variables ranged from task engagement and appropriate/inappropriate behaviors to academic goals of accuracy and productivity. All indicators of effectiveness (i.e., effect size, percentage of non-overlapping data points, and change in level) demonstrated a high level of effectiveness. Treatment fidelity, treatment acceptability, and social validity were areas largely unexplored by the included studies; however, when they were measured, reports were favorable. The use of functional assessment in developing interventions was also limited. Future studies should seek to include students from a variety of racial and cultural backgrounds and within classrooms outside of the confines of special education. Treatment fidelity should be more uniformly measured in order to ensure the intervention is being implemented to full strength, as well as to investigate what components are necessary for self-management to be effective. The use of functional assessment in the development of self-management interventions should be explored in order to determine its role in the outcomes of the intervention. |
