Abstract:

Behavioral self-management (BSM) techniques are based on cognitive-behavioral models that attribute self-directed learning and BSM to the reactive effects of cognitive factors, such as awareness and self-talk, and behavioral factors, such as antecedents, observable actions, and consequences (Kanfer & Karoly, 1972a, 1972b; Meichenbaum, 1977; Rachlin, 1974; Skinner, 1953). In 1973, Glynn, Thomas, and Shee proposed a four-component model of BSM: (a) self-assessment (e.g., covert questions about performance, such as “Am I on-task?”); (b) self-recording (e.g., overt responses to self-assessment questions, such as checking yes or no on a self-recording form); (c) self-determination of reinforcement (i.e., specifying types, amounts, and schedules of reinforcement); and (d) self-administration of reinforcement (i.e., delivering reinforcement contingent on performance). The first two components in this BSM model comprise self-monitoring, which can be cued covertly (i.e., student reminds self) or overtly (e.g., via audio, visual, or tactile cues). Meichenbaum (1977) described another traditional BSM component, self-verbalization or self-instruction, in which students talk themselves through a task (e.g., studying, “Look at the first word, say and spell it. Car, c-a-r.”).
The purpose of this paper is to report results of a comprehensive analytic review of recent BSM interventions for students with disabilities in inclusive settings. We analyze critically these recent BSM studies and provide corresponding recommendations for researchers and practitioners. We address three major questions.
1. To what extent have researchers investigated the use of BSM techniques by students with disabilities in general education settings? Have researchers expanded investigations of BSM techniques in integrated or inclusive settings?
2. How have these BSM techniques been implemented (e.g., specific procedures used, participants and types of disabilities selected, and outcome variables targeted)? Have investigators diversified BSM techniques and applied novel BSM techniques, including technology-mediated cuing systems (e.g., mobile devices) in integrated or inclusive settings?
3. How effective have BSM techniques been in improving academic and social outcomes for students with disabilities in general education settings? To what extent have BSM techniques fulfilled their oft-cited potential as inclusive techniques?

Keywords:

Behavior self-management, disabilities, self-monitoring.