Increasing on-task behavior and academic productivity
Upper elementary school students with learning disabilities
In individual conferences, the teacher explained to the students the importance of paying attention and completing work. She taught them self-monitoring techniques. When the students heard an intermittent tone they recorded whether they were paying attention by checking yes or no on a sheet of paper. Students kept a record of productivity by counting the number of spelling words they had completed by the end of the period. These procedures occurred five times per week.
Observe the students' behavior systematically to determine whether they are attending more frequently and getting more done.
Harris, K. (1986). Self-monitoring of attentional behavior versus self-monitoring of productivity: Effects on on-task behavior and academic response rate among learning disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 417-423.
Kelly S. Trevillian, Jennifer Henry, and Anne Grymes,UVA
Decrease time taken to walk to special classes
Three boys with behavior disorders
To set up this intervention, a nonhandicapped student of similar size and age of the three boys was asked to walk directly from each of the three boys regular classrooms to the resource room. The student was asked to walk at a normal speed and go directly to the resource room. Each trip was timed with a stop-watch that was set up at the teachers desk. The student would push the button to start the stopwatch when leaving the regular classrooms and then push the button to stop the stopwatch when reaching the resource room. The times of each trip were averaged to establish a reasonable time to get from each of the three boys classrooms to the resource room.
The treatment came next. It consisted of telling the three students how important it was to go to the resource room and back to the regular room in an efficient and orderly manner. When the treatment began, the button for the stopwatch was moved from the teacher's desk and placed on the wall next to the door of each of the third grade classrooms. The three boys were shown how the stopwatch worked and were allowed to play with the stopwatch for a few minutes. The boys were then shown a form that was labeled "Am I On Time Form". This form was for the students to put a plus sign every time they arrived on time and a zero if they did not arrive on time. If the boys received enough plus signs, they received reinforcements consisting of verbal praise provided by the resource teacher and an assortment of edible rewards and trinkets which were placed in cans in the resource room.
To evaluate this intervention; data showed how many times the boys showed up on time to the resource room. The data also showed how many times the boys did not show up on time and how long(in minutes and seconds) it took them when they were late. The resource teacher checked the accuracy of the students' recording on the final follow-up check. The teacher also independently measured the number of days they met the criteria during the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, and 12th weeks of the program.
Minner, Sam. (1990). Use of a self-recording procedure to decrease the time taken by behaviorally disordered students to walk to special classes. Behavioral Disorders, 15(14), 210-215.
Khristina Kohl, ETSU
Improving attention-to-task behavior
Elementary grade students with learning disabilities
Attention-to-task or on-task behavior may be increased by using self-assessed self-recording techniques. Before beginning the self-management procedure, the teacher must teach the students how to monitor their own behaivor. In a 20-minute session the teacher should explain, model, and supervise use of the procedure. The self-assessment condition requires the use of an audiotape recorder which emits quiet tones on an average of once every 40 seconds (ranging between 10 and 90 seconds). When the tone sounds, the student was told to ask himself, "Was I paying attention?" and then record his "yes" or "no" answer on a prepared recording sheet at his desk. Supervision may gradually fade as the student uses the technique correctly. The students continue to use the audiotape procedure during a regularly scheduled independent work period for approximately 6 to 8 weeks. At that point, the teacher may remove the tape-recorded cues and direct the students to record whether they are paying attention whenever they think about it. After one week, the teacher may remove the prepared recording sheet and direct students to continue working. These changes in the program should be made at the specified times only if the students' behavior is consistently high; if performance drops, then the entire procedure (tape cues, self-recording sheets) should be reinstituted.
Observe students' attention to task systematically. Monitor their productivity (% of daily independent work completed accurately).
Hallahan, D.P., Lloyd, J.W., Kneedler, R.D., & Marshall, K.J. (1982). A comparison of the effects of self- versus teacher-assessment of on-task behavior. Behavior Therapy, 13, 715-723.
Heather Love Stephens, and Angelique Tritaris, UVA
Increasing attention to task
Elementary grade student with learning disabilities
Six phases were used in the study . In the first phase (Baseline 1), the student was told to sit in his seat and work on his handwriting and math. Occasionally the teacher praised him as well as other classmates when on task behavior was displayed. The student as well as his other classmates would recieve a point for finishing their work on time. In the second phase (Self-monitoring with tape 1), the teacher took the student aside and told him she wanted him to help himself monitor his behavior by recording if he was off or on task. She gave the student a self-monitoring sheet and a tape recorder. When the tape recorder sounded a low tone, the student was to ask himself, "Was I paying attention?" He was then to mark a check in the yes or no column of the self-recording sheet. On the first day, the teacher provided explanations for why she was doing this, demonstrated how to do it, and had the student practice doing it under her supervisions. On subsequent days, she simply directed him to use the procedure during the seat work period. In the third phase (Baseline 2), the tape recorder and self- monitoring sheet were removed and the student was given no instructions to self-monitor. The fourth phase (Self-monitoring with tape 2), was the same as phase 2. In the fifth phase (Self-monitoring without tape), the tape recorder with tones was not used; instead the teacher told the student to ask himself periodically, "Was I paying attention?" The student would then simply check yes or no on his sheet. In the final phase (Self-praise), the self-monitoring sheet was also withdrawn but the student was told to ask himself periodically, "Was I paying attention?" If he was, he was to tell himself, "Good job." If he was not he was to tell himself, "I better start paying better attention."
Systematically observe the percent of time the students spend on-task and make records of how much of their seat work they complete in consistent amounts of time.
Hallahan, D. P., Lloyd, J. W., Kosiewicz, M. M., Kauffman, J. M., & Graves, A. W. (1979). Self-monitoring attention attention as a treatment for a learning disabled boy's off-task behavior. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 24-32.
Leslie Kelley Rust, UVA
Increasing on-task behavior and assignment completion
Elementary grade students with behavior disorders
The teacher distributed a dittoed sheet composed of 50 small squares to each student and then gave one of two possible sets of instructions:  to record behavior on the sheet as either on task (+) or off task (-) at random intervals decided by the student,  in addition to recording behavior, accuracy will be measured and rewarded by the teacher. Students following the second set of instructions discussed the procedure and practiced accurate self-recording twice before the implementation of consequences. The self-recording procedure was used during individual work time requiring high concentration. The teacher gave students responsibility and control over evaluation of personal conduct. Gradually, the teacher faded the treatment, at which time some students continued to use the principles of self- monitoring.
Observe percent of assignment completion and total number of on-task behaviors.
McLaughlin, T. F. (1984). A comparison of self-recording and self-recording plus consequences for on-task and assignment completion. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 9, 185-192.
Laura M. Foss, Tamara Josaitis, and Jason Tiede, UVA
Following class rules and attention to task
Middle school students with a history of demonstrating behavior problems including disruptive behavior and inattentiveness to classroom tasks.
The teacher assesses the student each day regarding percentage of time spent obeying classroom rules and attention to classroom tasks. The teacher must develop an objective criterion for him/herself such as a checklist of the specific behaviors that the child needs to improve. At five minute intervals, using a timing device, the teacher checks to see if the child is on task or paying attention and following rules and marks the checklist "yes" or "no." At the end of the day, a report card based on the percentage of time spent in appropriate behavior is sent home to inform the guardian about classroom behavior. A positive evaluation results in granting of specific privileges in the home while a negative evaluation results in the removal of privileges and the assignment of extra chores.
Once behavior reaches a level of expectations or is similar to other students, the frequency of evaluation is reduced to twice a week, however the student is still responsible for his/her classroom behavior. Although the number of evaluations is reduced, each covers the behavior for all the days in between report cards.
The teacher uses a checklist of specific behaviors that the child needs to improve and rates "yes" or "no" according to whether or not the child displayed the behavior. If the student is on task for the required percentage of time, s/he receives a positive evaluation.
Bailey, J.W., Wolf, M. M., & Phillips, E.L. (1970). Home-based reinforcement and the modification of predelinquents' classroom behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 223-233.
Alyson Rice, and Heather Stephens, UVA
Increasing on-task and on-schedule behavior
4 males with a diagnosis of autism
Each boy was given a photographic activity schedule in a three-ring binder. Each picture was mounted in the center of a single page so that there were no distractions. The boys were to look at the picture books and engage in the activity on the page. First, the teacher taught the boys how to use the pictorial schedules, guiding the boys step by step. Then, they graduated from the guidance and began to use the notebook on their own.
On task and on-schedule behavior was recorded for the participants. These variables were used to measure procedures. The boy was considered on-task if 1) he was visually attending to any appropriate play or work, 2) he was looking as his pictorial schedules, 3) using play or work materials appropriately, and 4) in transition from one activity to another. On-schedule was scored if the participant was engaged in the activity depicted on the page which the book was opened to.
MacDuff, S., Krantz, P., & McClannahan, L. (1993). Teaching children with autism to use photographic activity schedules: maintenance and generalization of complex response chains. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 27, 2, 89-92.
Annette Fender, ETSU
Improving on-task behavior and reading comprehension
Junior High School students in a special education classroom who ask little or no questions during class time
Prior to beginning any reading assignments, the teacher instructed the student to raise his/her hand and ask a question whenever he/she encountered difficulty with the task. Every time the student raised his/her hand either the teacher or an aide promptly approached the student and answered the question. Prompting by the teacher occurred three times a day and slowly decreased until prompting was no longer needed.
Record the number of questions asked by the students. Through the observations of an independent classroom observer record the amount of on-task performance. Comparisons of improvement can be evaluated by conducting baseline measures before implementing the prompting technique.
Knapczyk, D.R., & Livingston, G. (1974). The effects of prompting question-asking upon on-task behavior and reading comprehension. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,7, 115-121.
Justine Granski, and Tamara Josaitis, UVA
Increasing task attending behavior of a distracted student
A student with deviant behaviors in an experimental class for behaviorally disordered children for two months in a fourth grade class
In a setting with a table, two chairs, a lamp, and an educational task, the student was instructed to work on this task. In a given interval of time of 30 seconds, a click would sound. The experimenter would reward the student with a checkmark (earned point) if the student was not distracted by this sound. No feedback was given from the correctness of the responses. Attending behaviors included: looking at the assigned task, working on problems, and recording responses. Non-attending behaviors were defined as: looking away from task by eye movements or turning of the head, bringing another object in the field of vision (other than the pencil, book, and answer sheet), attending to the click sound, and making other marks on answer sheet (doodling). The recording system included: Z= beginning of a new period, J=continuation of same event through 10-second intervals, /=a reinforcement (audible click indicated reinforcement), and -=the student attending the click. A certain number of points could be exchanged for the reward of the student's choice. This program was then generalized in the regular classroom. The student had a point record form on his desk each day.
Record one point for every interval of 30 minutes in which the student was attending to the task. The teacher should record these points on the student's point record form on his/her desk each day.
Walker, H. M., & Buckley, N. K. (1968). The use of positive reinforcement in conditioning attending behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 245-250.
Patricia Luke, and Betsey Kaestner, UVA
Improving classroom attention level
Four general education classes (kindergarten, third, fifth, and sixth)
Teacher will need a timer-light device for this technique. The light needs to be visible to all students. Teacher will turn timer on and light off when all children are paying attention (i.e.: appropriate body position, appropriate noise level, and appropriate verbal and non-verbal responses during instruction). When one or more students is not paying attention, the teacher stops the timer which automatically turns the red light on. The teacher uses the light/timer for approximately one week before explaining its purpose to the children. The students are then told that the light comes on when a student is inattentive. This will help them learn to monitor their own attention. Reinforcements, such as additional playtime, tokens, and privileges, are given to a class as a whole as their attention level improves. This technique is incorporated into a normal teaching routine.
Assess the percentage of time that the light remains off. Also, evaluate whether students are completing more assignments.
Packard,R.G. (1970). The control of "classroom attention": A group contingency for complex behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 13-28.
J. Robin Albertson-Wren, and Kathryn Linnenberg, UVA
Improving attention, accuracy, and productivity
One female and 5 males with learning disabilities (ages 9 years, 3 months-11 years, 5 months)
Each learner received training in three types of self-monitoring: attention, productivity, and accuracy. Training for self-monitoring attention included a discussion of the importance of paying attention, instruction in self-recording on a form whether or not they were on task when cued by a taped tone. Learners were taught to mark the problem on which they were working, count the numbers of problems worked since the previous tone, and record the number of problems on the recording form during self-monitoring productivity training. In order to self-monitor accuracy, learners were taught to count the number of problems completed correctly since the previous tone and record on a tally card. All training occurred in a resource setting and self-monitoring occurred in the general education math classroom during independent practice.
All subjects improved in at least one area of self-monitoring. The self-monitoring of productivity resulted in an increased number of problems completed for all learners. The mean percentage of intervals on-task increased noticeably for all but 2 learners. The percentage of problems completed accurately also improved for all learners in at least one of the treatment conditions. The research results indicated that self-monitoring different variables does not appear to differentially affect on-task behavior, self-monitoring different target variables differentially affects academic productivity and/or accuracy, and self-monitoring academic outcomes is more effective than self-monitoring attention for academic productivity and accuracy, and learners prefer to monitor academic outcomes. The research findings indicated that the use of self-monitoring can be an effective technique in the inclusive classroom.
Maag, J.W., Reid, R., & DiGangi, S.A. (1993). Differential effects of self-monitoring attention, accuracy, and productivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 329-344.
Susan M. Hubley, ETSU
Decreasing off-task behavior
11 year old, 5th grade boy diagnosed with Attention Defecit Hyperactivity Disorder
The classroom teacher used a device called the Attention Training System, which is a remote device. The teacher had one device and the student another. The device the student had automatically added up points on a minute by minute basis, unless he became disruptive or off task. At this time, the teacher could press her remote without saying a word, and the little red light on the students remote would light up to alert him that he had lost a point and would be unable to earn any more points for the next few minutes. The student was able to receive tokens at the end of every day for the amount of points he had earned. At the end of the week, he could buy things from the teacher like school supplies, puzzles, etc. with his tokens.
The researcher counted how many times the student became disruptive or off task during three different periods a day for fifteen minutes each period. Before the subject used the attention training system, his off task behaviors averaged 4.67 per class period. During the time the subject was using the attention training system, his off task behaviors averaged 1.44 per class period. The subject then quit using the attention training system for two weeks in which his off task behaviors rose up to 2.45 per class period. The attention training system was reimplemented with the student for the last 2 weeks, and his off task behaviors decreased to 0.87 per class period.
Evans, J.H., Ferre, L., Ford, L.A.,& Green, J.L.(1995). Decreasing attention defecit disorder symptoms utilizing an automated classroom reinforcement device. Psychology in the Schools, 32, 210-219.
Elizabeth J. Edwards, ETSU
Decreasing disruptive and non-attending behavior
A 9 year old third grade male, diagnosed as ADHD
The teacher of this boy changed the physical design, management, curriculum, and lesson presentation in her remedial assistance classroom to see if she would be able to reduce disruptive and non-attending behavior in this particular child. Before intervention, the four students in this period chose where they wished to sit at one table in close proximity to each other. The teacher didn't try to be seated near the subject or seat him where he would have the least distractions. There was no predicted structure to the class, instead class activities varied from day to day. Class rules were not reviewed at the start of class, and directions were given verbally. The curriculum focused on satisfying requests from the teacher to review for tests, reteach skills, and preview topics or skills. Instruction consisted of explanation and practice involving oral recitation, worksheets and games. Students had little choice in the learning activity. During intervention, the teacher changed the physical design of the classroom to where the students only got to decide where to sit part of the time, and she assigned seats at separate desks for independent written work. The subject was assigned to the quietest place of the room during independent work time, and the teacher made sure to position herself near the subject. Many new management techniques were employed for the intervention as well. A chart of class rules and the daily routine was posted in view of everyone, and procedures were reviewed daily. No teaching was begun until the teacher had full attention of all the children, and light signals were used to indicate the start and end of activities and seating changes. Directions were given verbally and in writing. The curriculum and lesson presentation were modified to resemble a reading workshop where reading and writing were practiced in an holistic manner. The forty minute period was divided into four segments consisting of (1) reading aloud by the teacher, (2) sustained silent reading of self-selected materials, (3) oral or written sharing of one's reading, and (4) mini-lessons related to skills used during silent reading.
The study was conducted over seven and one half weeks. To record disruptive or non-attentive behavior, the teacher made tally marks on masking tape on her wrist. Before intervention, the subject displayed disruptive behavior an average of 8 times per class period. During intervention 1, the subject displayed disruptive behavior and average of 2 times per period. The teacher then returned to her preintervention classroom techniques, and the subjects disruptive behavior rose back up to an average of 6.3 occurrences in one class period. The intervention was then reintroduced and the subjects disruptive behavior fell back down to an average of 2.6 occurrences a class period.
Greenewald, M.J., & Walsh, C.(1996). The effect of environmental accommodations on attending behavior of an ADHD chapter 1 student: An action research study. New York, NY. American Educational Research Association.
Elizabeth J. Edwards, ETSU
Keeping a child on task
six children (3 male and 3 female) between the ages of 6 and 9 years old who had been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
A certified teacher managed four children at one time in 13 sessions each of which lasted 50 minutes (the six participants were part of an original group of twelve who were involved in this program; the remaining six could not be included because they attended less than 75% of the sessions). A trained observer was situated behind a one-way mirror that allowed for full view of the treatment room. An attention trainer was placed in front of each child and introduced as "Mr. Attention." The children were told that Mr. Attention would help them learn to concentrate on their work by awarding them a point for each minute that they attended to their worksheets. It was also explained that a helper behind the mirror would press a button that led to a point reduction at times when they did not stay seated, went off task, made noises, or touched Mr. Attention. Points could be used to "purchase" special prizes. The observer, a masters-level school psychologist, deducted points if the child's attention wandered away from the task for more than 15 seconds at a time. If a child was judged to be off task, the observer would press a button on a remote control module that caused a red light to shine on the child's console and a point to be deducted. The study covered 13 consecutive weeks. The attention trainer was used during weeks 3-11. The 2 weeks at the onset and the last 2 weeks represented no treatment phases.
The researcher counted the number of times for each session that a child was off-task. In five of the six cases, children's level of attention to task improved markedly from the starting point to the training phases and then deteriorated once Mr. Attention was removed. Implementation of the Attention Training System appeared to have an immediate and powerful effect on the level of sustained attention. In five of the six cases, few if any deductions were necessary past the first two or three sessions. Improvements in on task behavior appear to require ongoing use of the Attention Training System, at least for a period longer than 13 weeks.
Gordon, M., Thompson, D., Cooper, S., & Ivers, C. L. (1991). Nonmedical treatment of ADHD/hyperactivity: The Attention Training System. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 151-159.
Sarah Hall, ETSU
Decreasing off-task and disruptive behaviors
Fifth graders described as being low performing math students who were disruptive during seatwork, rarely completing math assignments
Participants were paired with peers during seatwork that consisted of independent math assignments. The partners alternated the roles of peer monitor and point earner each session. The peer monitorís job was to observe his/her partner's (i.e., the point earnerís) behavior at intervals while also completing his/her own math assignment. The peer monitor completed a "good behavior checklist," consisting of 3 yes/no questions pertaining to on/off task behavior: Sitting in chair? Being quiet? Working on assignment? The good behavior checklist was completed 3 times/15-20 minute session at unpredicted intervals prompted via headset. At the end of a session, the peer monitor also completed a "good work checklist," consisting of 6 yes/no questions regarding the point earner's work completion and neatness (but not accuracy). The peer monitor then counted up the number of "yes" answers and awarded a point for a score of 13 or more. Daily points were recorded on a chart hanging in the classroom. Each student alternated roles, and, at the end of the week, points were exchanged for a reward.
Chart the number of points each student receives daily and monitor progress, including work accuracy. Compare improvements in behavior to academic performance.
Stern, G. W., Fowler, S. A., & Kohler, F. W. (1988). A comparison of two intervention roles: Peer monitor and point earner. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 103-109.
Karen Dayton, ETSU
Keeping students on task during independent seat work
Two 3rd or 4th grade boys disengaged from tasks
For this intervention, two undergraduate and two graduate students observed and recorded the data on student engagement to tasks at the same time each morning. To setup the intervention, the teacher and her assistant conducted the class in the usual manner and recorded the behavior of the boys to compare with the experiment. During the experiment there were three different sequences used. One sequence was used in the first two minutes followed by an eight minute extinction period. During the praise only sequence the students were praised four times with no other interventions. During the praise-redirect sequence the boys were praised and given a redirect order such as "Good job, now continue with the work". This sequence was called the "instructional control" phase. The last sequence was the praise and positive attention phase, the praise was followed by paying attention to the student.
The data collected by the undergraduate and the graduate students showed the results of each set of sequences and how they could be used to keep the boys on task. The experiment showed that the praise and redirect sequences kept the boys on task longer than the other two sequences.
Bradley,T., Eckert, T., & Martins, B. (1997). Effects of reinforcement history and instructions on the persistence of student engagement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 569-572.
Shirley Dunn, ETSU
improving time on-task
nine boys and one girl between the ages of five and eight with ADHD and/or behavioral disorders
An experiment with children was conducted using a variety of different toys and games to see how disciplined the children were in playing with the toys and how long their attention span would be. The students were scored on how they played or observed a particular toy, and they were also scored on whether or not any of the play things interested them at all.
Time with an academic task such as math or copying letters was the primary goal, and was viewed as writing or directly participating in the task.
The results suggested that the different methods of play were not necessarily equal for each child. To ask a child with ADHD to identify and name their own reinforcer could limit the treatment, and yet, the use of a forced-choice format may escalate into a verbal confrontation.
Broussard, C., George, T., Jones, K., & Northup, J. (Spring 1995). A preliminary comparison of reinforcer assessment methods for children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 99-100.
Ann Carter, ETSU