Intensive Intervention

Practice Guide:
Self-Monitoring Systems to
Improve Behavior Outcomes for
Students With Comorbid Academic
and Behavior Difficulties
Ashleigh Avina, University of Minnesota
Jessica Boyle, Vanderbilt University
Tobey Duble Moore, University of Connecticut
Elizabeth A. Hicks, Michigan State University
Diana M. Wiggins, University of Illinois at Chicago
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 2

This project was supported in part by Grant H325H190003 from the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). Opinions expressed herein are those of
the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of Education,
and no official endorsement by it should be inferred.

This product is public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. Although
permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: Avina, A., Boyle, J.,
Duble Moore, T., Hicks, E. A., & Wiggins, D. M. (2022). Practice Guide: Self-Monitoring Systems
to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties.
Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.

Fall 2022

Graphic services supported in part by EKS NICHD Grant #1P50HD103537-01 to the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 3

Contents
What Is It?........................................................................................... 4

For Whom Is It Intended?................................................................... 5

How Does It Work?............................................................................. 6

How Can Families Support Implementation?.................................... 11

How Practical Is It?............................................................................. 12

How Adequate Is the Research Knowledge Base?............................ 12

How Effective Is It?............................................................................. 13

What Questions Remain?................................................................... 13

Where Can I Learn More?.................................................................. 14

References.......................................................................................... 15
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 4

What Is It?
The purpose of self-monitoring systems is to develop students’ self-determination skills by
improving the awareness of their own behavior. Crucial components of a self-monitoring system
include students observing, evaluating, and recording their own behavior that is explicitly defined;
students striving for independence and maintaining positive outcomes; and generalization of
these skills beyond the initial training setting (Bruhn et al., 2015).

Self-monitoring is a strategy that teaches students to self-assess their behavior and

record the results. Though it does not create new skills or knowledge, self-monitoring
does increase or decrease the frequency, intensity, or duration of existing behavior.
(IRIS Center, 2022).

Among the two most common self-monitoring approaches include, (a) a student monitors and
records the presence of a behavior and (b) a student rates their own behavior according to a set
of pre-specified criteria. In the following sections, we describe the benefits of self-monitoring and
these two common approaches.

Self-monitoring is a useful system that allows a student to track their own behavior, receive
feedback, and access contingent reinforcement. Nelson et al. (2019) explains the benefit of
using self-monitoring systems is improved use of executive functioning which can be evident in a
students’ improved independence and academic outcomes. Executive functioning is defined as
the “sum product of a collection of higher level skills that converge to enable an individual to adapt
and thrive in complex psychosocial environments” (Goldstein, 2014, p. 5). Some of those higher
level skills can include goal selection, planning, initiation of activity, self-regulation, mental flexibil-
ity, deployment of attention, and utilization of feedback (Goldstein, 2014). Self-monitoring tech-
niques can be implemented in the classroom while teachers are teaching whole group instruction
without having to count or rate a student’s behavior simultaneously (Webber et al., 1993). It can
be increasingly beneficial for general education teachers who have large groups of students and/
or multiple students who need behavior support. A crucial component of behavior management for
students with disabilities is to promote self-determination skills to improve independence. An addi-
tional positive outcome associated with self-monitoring systems includes the benefit of improved
executive functioning skills. Self-monitoring is a lifelong skill that when taught can develop and
create improved outcomes for individuals with disabilities including increased learning, motiva-
tion, and metacognitive skills (Nelson, 2019). Teaching students with disabilities how to manage
their own behavior can carry over to developing additional behaviors that will improve their life-
long success (Webber et al., 1993). When used appropriately and with fidelity as an intervention,
classroom teachers can expect to experience a significant decrease in student off-task behaviors
that allow for more uninterrupted instructional time. The initial time it takes to engage the student
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 5

in the intervention and successfully teach self-monitoring procedures is significantly less than the
time that teacher would have spent engaging in student redirection. After initial implementation, a
teacher will only have to provide occasional prompts and reminders at a rate far less than before
intervention implementation (Vanderbilt, 2005). Studies that have included self-monitoring as a
part of the intervention treatment package, were able to show a decrease in problem behaviors
from an average of 22% to an average of 4%. While there was a simultaneous increase in aca-
demic engagement from an average of 37% to an average of 86% (Pinkelman & Horner, 2017).

Many schools are implementing and requiring teachers to execute multi-tiered systems of support
(MTSS) within their classrooms and school-wide. In fact, MTSS has been shown as an effective
framework for improving both academic and behavioral outcomes. Furthermore, there is evidence
to suggest that schools implementing MTSS show improvement in classroom management
(Grasley-Boy et al., 2019). Self-monitoring systems are a great way to increase behaviors that
are compatible with learning or for teachers to teach students who have severe or challenging
behavior appropriate replacement behaviors (Sayeski & Brown, 2011).

For Whom Is It Intended?

The individualized and flexible nature of self-monitoring interventions allow these strategies to be
used with various age groups of students with or without disabilities. Self-monitoring systems are
highly adaptable to meet a wide range of student needs including those students with the most
severe and persistent behavioral and learning needs (Kuchle & Riley-Tillman, 2019). Additionally,
students at risk for a disability should learn self-determination skills to improve their quality of
life with more independence. Additionally, self-monitoring interventions can be used to target the
reduction of challenging behavior or to increase academic skills; therefore, this strategy may be
appropriate for students with comorbid academic and behavioral needs to embed in academic
instruction. It might be important to start teaching students these skills early in their development
rather than waiting until later. Self-monitoring systems can be embedded within any tier of MTSS
by individualizing and customizing the system to meet a student’s unique educational, social,
and emotional goals (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). The target behavior chosen for the self-monitoring
system should be directly tied to the school-wide behavior expectations. More specifically, the
self-monitoring system should increase the student’s access to the school-wide acknowledgement
system. In practice, this might be a different teacher acknowledging the students on-task behavior
in other locations. Due to the complex nature of comorbid academic and behavioral needs, it is
critical for practitioners to use data-based individualization (DBI) to create, implement, adapt,
and progress monitor the students’ response to the intervention. This is an ongoing process that
will ensure the self-monitoring system continues to support students with complex academic and
behavioral difficulties that are always changing (Lemons et al., 2019).
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 6

How Does It Work?

Planning and implementing self-monitoring interventions can be broken into three general steps:
1) developing the self-monitoring system, 2) teaching the student the system, and
3) implementing the plan.

Step 1: Developing the self-monitoring system

Identify the target behavior
To begin planning and developing a self-monitoring intervention, select a target behavior for the
student to self-monitor. Importantly, teachers should ensure that the behavior to be addressed
is not in conflict with the student’s cultural norms or values. For example, often students are
expected to demonstrate engagement by looking directly at the speaker; however, in some
cultures children are taught that behavior is disrespectful. The behavior should be stated in a
positive manner (Menzies et al., 2009). If the student is engaging in challenging behavior, select
an appropriate replacement behavior that the student could increase rather than focusing on
the negative behavior. For example, if the student is frequently off-task or disruptive, the target
behavior could be on-task behavior or asking for help. Additionally, it is important that the student
can already perform the expected behavior because self-monitoring systems do not teach
students new skills. Rather, they allow students to set goals, self-observe, and self-record their
performance of known behaviors (Rafferty, 2010).

Define the target behavior

After the student and teacher select a target behavior, it is important to define the behavior with
specific, observable, and measurable terms (Wehmeyer, 2009). This creates a detailed, clear
picture of what the behavior looks like. It may also be helpful to include examples and non-
examples to allow the student to discriminate when the behavior is or is not occurring (Bell et al.,
2013). An example of an operational definition of the above behavior, on-task behavior, is “looking
at the current activity, following along with teacher instruction and directions, and working with
materials appropriately.” Examples of on-task behavior include writing numbers or words on the
assigned task and looking at the board and teachers while the teacher is talking. Non-examples
of on-task behavior include talking to a friend while the teacher is talking or participating in a
different task than the one assigned.

When and where

Next, determine when the student will use the self-monitoring system. This should be decided
based on when and where the target behavior is occurring (to decrease) or is not occurring (to
increase). Each self-monitoring system can be individualized to support students during specific
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 7

times of day based on when and where the student is demonstrating challenging behavior. If
a student only needs additional support during one challenging class per day, then they could
implement the self-monitoring system during only that class. In contrast, if the student could ben-
efit from self-monitoring throughout the entire school day, it is helpful to break the day into small
chunks of time (e.g., each class period, morning, and afternoon). This allows the student to be
rewarded if they are successful during at least one of the times (Menzies, et al., 2009). Addition-
ally, by breaking the school day into small chunks of time, the teacher can see where the behavior
is occurring most often to allow you to provide more support or prompts during those times.

Create and/or locate materials

Create or use a previously created self-monitoring form/data collection sheet that is age and
developmentally appropriate, simple, and divided into specific time windows (Rafferty, 2010).
Specific time windows can be decided by considering class periods, individual activities, morning
and afternoon classes. When students are first learning to self-monitor it is best to start with
smaller time windows to allow them to practice multiple times per day. The following should be
included on the form: target behavior definition, time windows or settings listed, and space for
the student to self-record the occurrence of the target behavior. Additionally visual supports (e.g.,
smiley faces, thumbs up thumbs down) that are helpful for the student to independently self-
record can also be added (Menzies et al., 2009). Previously created behavior rating forms can be
found here: https://dbr.education.uconn.edu/library/information-for-parents-and-professionals/.
Additionally, see below for two example data forms.

Figure 1. An example of a self-monitoring datasheet for a student to monitor their work

completion and effort.

Name: Date:
Goal: (example) I will do all my work in at least 3 classes, and I will try my best in at least 3 classes.

Class/Subject Did I do all of my work? Did I try my best?

Math Yes / No Yes / No

Reading Yes / No Yes / No

Writing Yes / No Yes / No

Science Yes / No Yes / No

Daily Totals I did all my work in ____ classes. I tried my best in ____ classes

Note: The student would use this form to mark yes or no for both questions at the end of each
class period. This form would be used across one school day.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 8

Figure 2. An example of a self-monitoring datasheet for a student to monitor their on task

behavior during one class period/activity.

Name: Date:
Goal: (example) I will be on-task (focusing on my teacher or my work) at least 75% of math class.

Am I on-task?

5 minutes Yes J No L
10 minutes

15 minutes

20 minutes

Note: The student would use this form to mark yes or no at every 5 minute interval. This form
would be used for one class period or for one activity.

Collecting data
For practitioners to effectively create and use the self-monitoring plan for their students, it is
critical to thoroughly understand the data-based individualization (DBI) process. Below are the
steps for using DBI within self-monitoring interventions. Educators should prepare systems and
procedures for these steps prior to implementing a self-monitoring intervention.

1. Select an evidence-based intervention program (i.e., self-monitoring)

2. Select a progress monitoring system that is ongoing and frequently used to assess the
students’
• A simple example of this could be a paper-pencil graph used to display the frequency
or rate of the students’ behavior.
3. Set a goal for the student to strive towards
4. Collect frequent (e.g., daily, weekly) data and graph those data
5. Analyze the data on a consistent basis (e.g., weekly) to determine how the student is
responding to the self-monitoring intervention
• No improvements (stagnant data) - consider adapting components of the self-
monitoring systems and/or consider the need for further behavioral assessment
• Improvements (decrease in challenging behavior or increase in prosocial behavior) -
continue implementing self-monitoring system until student may be ready to begin the
fading process
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 9

Step 2: Teaching the student the self-monitoring system

After designing the procedures and materials, teach the student how to use the self-monitoring
system. This includes sharing the target behavior definition, in positive, student-friendly language
and explicitly teaching the steps for self-monitoring (Rafferty, 2010). When discussing the target
behavior, it is critical to share why the target behavior is important in order to increase the
student’s buy-in. When explaining the definition of the target behavior, students often benefit from
the discussion of examples and non-examples, but also may need images, video models that can
be reviewed as needed, and peer models to differentiate between engaging and not-engaging
behavior. When explicitly teaching the steps for self-monitoring, the teacher should model the
steps and then allow the student opportunities for guided and independent practice while
providing feedback to the student. Modeling and practice can be applied to how to monitor the
behavior, how to record the behavior on the self-monitoring form, how to determine if the student
met their goal and/or rewards, and how to self-graph.

Step 3: Implementing the plan

Provide initial support
When the student first starts using the self-monitoring system, adults should monitor the
student’s ability to accurately identify and record the target behavior. If the student is unable to
do so initially, provide reminders and prompts in the moment. Continue to monitor their ability to
accurately self-monitor and systematically fade your support over time.

Monitor student’s progress

Based on progress monitoring data (e.g., baseline data, self-monitoring data), teachers can
determine how students are progressing and if self-monitoring is helping to improve the student’s
behavior. Baseline data, data recorded to reflect the current frequency, rate, duration, or
intensity of the student’s behavior, should be data collected prior to the implementation of the
self-monitoring system. Collecting baseline data helps you answer the question, “What does
the student’s behavior look like before this support goes into place?” These baseline data will
later help you determine if the student is benefitting from the self-monitoring intervention by
comparing data between baseline and when the self-monitoring intervention is in place. Visual
representations (e.g., graphs) of the data allow teachers to assess students’ progress. Teachers
can then make decisions about adapting or modifying the self-monitoring system to better meet
the needs of students. As mentioned before, it is critical for teachers to continue to monitor a
student’s performance through a systematic data collection process.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 10

Self-graphing
Self-graphing has been proven to be helpful in increasing positive, desirable behaviors during
self-monitoring interventions because of the visual stimulus it provides (Bruhn et al., 2012). A
graph can be used to create a visual of how the student is doing across the times they are using
a self-monitoring system. This typically includes transferring the total number of target behaviors
across the class (if a student is only using a self-monitoring system in one class) or across the day
(if a student is using a self-monitoring system across the school day).

Incorporating reinforcement/rewards
Reinforcement is often included within self-monitoring interventions (Bruhn et al., 2012). Students
can receive some types of reward such as points, tickets, praise, or a tangible reward as a part of
their self-monitoring intervention. Rewards can be provided when students meet a predetermined
goal or for accurately self-monitoring (Bruhn et al., 2012). An example of a predetermined goal
for on-task behavior may be, “I will be on-task 8 out of 10 times each class period.” In order
to determine if a student is accurately self-monitoring, a teacher could take data at the same
time the student is self-recording and a comparison between the student and teacher data can
determine the students’ accuracy of self-recording.

Fading
Once the student is successful and showing improved rates of the target behavior, the use of
self-monitoring materials (e.g., recording data sheet, graph, cueing mechanisms) should be faded
over time. Fading can and should be individualized based on the student’s strengths and needs.
Fading can consist of increasing the time intervals (e.g., each class period to half days, each
activity to class periods) or increasing the goal the student is striving for (e.g., they were previously
working to have less than 5 disruptions per day, now they can work to have 1 or fewer disruptions
per day). The ultimate goal is for the student to internally monitor their own behavior without the
use of the self-monitoring system (Rafferty, 2010). Additionally, fading can be done by having
the student gradually self-record the target behavior less and less frequently. While the system is
being faded, the teacher should continue to monitor the frequency and/or rate of the students’
target behavior to ensure the student is remaining successful.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 11

How Can Families Support

Implementation?
A collaborative partnership between schools and families is an important way to promote
positive academic, behavioral, and social outcomes, especially for students who have disruptive
or challenging behaviors. Families can play a critical role in teaching children about the value
of school and the behaviors that lead to success. In fact, research suggests that high levels of
parent involvement are correlated with positive social, emotional, and behavioral outcomes
across diverse cultural, ethnic, linguistic, and socio-economic backgrounds (Davis, 2014; Milner
et al., 2019; NASP, 2005; Robinson & Fine, 2010). A true school-home partnership is built on a
foundation of shared understandings, goals, and responsibilities (Bellinger et al., 2016; Harvey
et al., 2003). Learning about a student through the lens of their family will give invaluable
information about the student’s prior knowledge and experience with school and behavior which
may then be used to create appropriate, meaningful, and relevant interventions (Milner et al.,
2019). With this shared understanding about a student’s background, teachers and families can
work in concert to select culturally appropriate target behaviors and create materials specifically
tailored to the individual. Therefore, it is essential that schools create an environment and culture
that encourages all families to become knowledgeable and confident partners.

The same behaviors teachers seek to address through self-monitoring systems at school are
likely also encountered by families at home (Harvey et al., 2003). Students with social, emotional,
and behavior difficulties respond well to consistent and predictable routines and interventions;
therefore, consistent messaging about behavior and use of interventions across settings will
prove most beneficial (Bellinger et al., 2016; Davis, 2014; Harvey et al., 2003). Research has
shown that approaches such as Conjoint Behavioral Consultation which provides collaborative
opportunities between families and teachers on ways to consistently address behavior across
settings can decrease problem behaviors and increase positive social behaviors (Sheridan et al.,
2017). Self-monitoring systems translate well across settings (Bruhn et al., 2015; Crutchfield et
al., 2015; Ennis et al., 2018) which makes them ideal interventions to use both at school and
home. For example, a student may self-monitor the same behavior at both school and home
and compare data with the teacher or family member respectively. Alternately, the teacher and
family may choose to use a self-monitoring intervention which incorporates contingent rewards
received at home. When schools and families collaboratively develop and implement behavior
interventions, behavior can significantly improve across settings (Bellinger et al., 2016).
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 12

How Practical Is It?

Although universal behavior supports focused on prevention are adequate for the majority of stu-
dents (Sayeski & Brown, 2011), some students need a more intensive and individualized approach
(Maggin et al., 2016). Self-monitoring is a relatively unobtrusive, quick, and easy to implement
strategy (Bruhn et al., 2015; Carr & Punzo, 1993; Rafferty, 2010). Also of benefit, self-monitoring
systems translate well across settings and content areas (Crutchfield, et al., 2015; Ennis et al.,
2018; Menzies et al., 2006) and are flexible enough to address a wide variety of behaviors.

The time required to set up and manage self-monitoring systems is reasonable, making them a
practical strategy for the majority of classrooms. In most cases, self-monitoring systems require
more time upfront during the initial planning and implementation phases (Harlacher et al., 2006;
Maggin et al., 2016; Peterson et al., 2006). However, teachers may expect that as the student
gains competence that adult support may be systematically faded (Bruhn et al., 2015; Crutchfield
et al., 2015; Menzies et al., 2006). Progress monitoring should be used throughout to make
data-driven decisions about whether to intensify or fade aspects of the system such as reinforcers
or rewards. Additionally, technology may be a time-saving tool to collect and analyze progress
monitoring data. According to Crutchfield (2015), the same educational applications used to
automatically prompt students to monitor their behavior and record a response (e.g. I-Connect)
may also be helpful to teachers to store and analyze the data collected. Self-monitoring is a
realistic and effective behavior intervention with broad appeal for teachers (Ennis et al., 2018).

How Adequate Is the Research

Knowledge Base?
Several studies using both single-case design and group methodology have been completed
to assess the effectiveness of self-monitoring systems. A variety of literature reviews have
been completed over the past decades, building upon previous reviews, and assessing the
effectiveness of interventions that utilize self-monitoring systems with different target groups
of students including looking broadly at its effects on students with disabilities (Briesch et al.
2009) or looking specifically at outcomes for students with autism (Carr et al., 2014). Behavioral
research on self-management interventions dates as far back as the 1970s when it was first
assessed as an intervention to increase positive behavior or decrease negative behaviors.
Since then, various studies have researched the effectiveness of self-monitoring interventions
on specific skills such as increasing independence and on-task behavior, reducing disruptive or
stereotypic behaviors. Research has also evaluated the effects of self-monitoring interventions on
academic outcomes across a variety of academic domains (Mooney et al., 2005).
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 13

How Effective Is It?

A literature review by Bruhn et al. (2015) reviewed the outcomes of 41 studies that utilized self-
monitoring interventions to target behavior-related dependent variables such as time on task
or completion of assignment in students with documented behavioral problems. The systematic
review found that each of the 41 studies demonstrated improvements in behavior because of
the implementation of self-monitoring systems. These improvements included decreases in
off-task behavior, disruptions, or negative social interactions or increases in behaviors such as
on-task behavior, work completion, or positive social interactions. The review specifically looked
at studies that targeted reinforcement and found that contingent reinforcement, which refers to
reinforcement that is delivered only after the target behavior has occurred (Cooper et al. 2019),
led to increased positive behavior outcomes as opposed to non-contingent reinforcement. Other
meta-analyses have found similarly positive effects specifically for students with autism, and
for all students, including those without disabilities (Briesch & Chafouleas, 2009). In terms of
academic outcomes, studies also support the use of self-monitoring to increase positive academic
outcomes across domains with lasting generalization of the self-monitoring skills in a non-training
setting and maintenance effects lasting beyond the completion of the initial training. (Mooney et
al., 2005).

What Questions Remain?

While various studies have looked at the effects of self-monitoring on both increasing and
decreasing certain behaviors across various populations, there are a number of questions
regarding specifics about self-monitoring that remain. Many studies have found that teachers
typically play a large role in the implementation of self-monitoring systems (Briesch & Chafouleas,
2009), and clarification about actual levels of student independence as well as generalization and
maintenance outcomes (Bruhn et al., 2015) should be studied. Literature reviews have also found
varied outcomes related to the effects of teacher feedback on self-monitoring systems especially
when the function of student behavior is escape-maintained (Bruhn et al., 2015), and this is an
area that would benefit from further exploration. Other questions of interest include the creation
of guidelines for fading and/or removing support, the role of function in development of the
intervention, and the use of technology as a tool to support self-monitoring systems.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 14

Where Can I Learn More?

• A website which outlines the basic steps of self-monitoring and includes links to additional
resources: https://www.pbisworld.com/tier-2/self-monitoring/

• A website with links to examples of rating scales and checklists:

https://www.interventioncentral.org/node/961544

• A website with resources on self-monitoring:

https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/sr/cresource/q2/p04/

• A website with practical recommendations for self-monitoring system setup and

implementation: https://www.theottoolbox.com/self-monitoring-strategies-for-kids/

• An article which explains self-monitoring and includes examples of forms and graphs
as well as additional tips:
Menzies, H., Lane, K, & Lee, J. (2006). Self-Monitoring Strategies for Use in the Classroom: A
Promising Practice to Support Productive Behavior for Students With Emotional or Behavioral
Disorders. Beyond Behavior, 27-35

• An article that describes the steps to teach students how to self-monitor:

Rafferty, L. A. (2010). Step-by-step: Teaching students to self-monitor. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 43(2), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005991004300205

• An article which includes the steps of self-monitoring attentional issues using technology:
Cook, K.B., & Sayeski, K. (2022). Self-monitoring with secondary students: Using a smartphone
app to increase attention to task. Beyond Behavior, 31(2) 92–102.
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 15

References
Bellinger, S. A., Lee, S. W., Jamison, T. R., & Reese, R. M. (2016). Conjoint behavioral consultation: community–
school collaboration and behavioral outcomes using multiple baseline. Journal of Educational and
Psychological Consultation, 26(2), 139–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2015.1089405

Bruhn, A., McDaniel, S., & Kreigh, C. (2015). Self-monitoring interventions for students with behavior problems:
A systematic review of current research. Behavioral Disorders, 40(2), 102–121. https://doi.org/10.17988/
bd-13-45.1

Carr, S. C., & Punzo, R. P. (1993). The effects of self-monitoring of academic accuracy and productivity on the
performance of students with behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 18(4), 241–250. https://doi.
org/10.1177/019874299301800401

Cook, K.B., & Sayeski, K. (2022). Self-monitoring with secondary students: Using a smartphone app to increase
attention to task. Beyond Behavior, 31(2) 92–102.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2019). Applied Behavior Analysis (3rd Edition). Hoboken, NJ:
Pearson Education

Crutchfield, S. A., Mason, R. A., Chambers, A., Wills, H. P., & Mason, B. A. (2014). Use of a self-monitoring
application to reduce stereotypic behavior in adolescents with autism: A preliminary investigation of
I-connect. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(5), 1146–1155. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10803-014-2272-x

Davis, M. (2014). Stop the blame game: Teachers and parents working together to improve outcomes for
students with behavior disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals,
23(2).

Ennis, R. P., Lane, K. L., & Oakes, W. P. (2018). Empowering teachers with low-intensity strategies to support
instruction: Self-monitoring in an elementary resource classroom. Preventing School Failure: Alternative
Education for Children and Youth, 62(3), 176–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2017.1408055

Goldstein, S., & Naglieri, J. A. (2014). Handbook of executive functioning. New York, NY: Springer.

Grasley-Boy, N., Gage, N. A., & MacSuga-Gage, A. S. (2019). Multitiered support for classroom management
professional development. Beyond Behavior, 28(1), 5-12.

Harlacher, J. E., Roberts, N. E., & Merrell, K. W. (2006). Classwide interventions for students with ADHD: A
summary of teacher options beneficial for the whole class. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 39(2), 6–13.
https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990603900202

Harvey, M. T., Lewis-Palmer, T., Horner, R. H., & Sugai, G. (2003). Trans-situational interventions:
Generalization of behavior support across school and Home Environments. Behavioral Disorders, 28(3),
299–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290302800306

IRIS Center. (2022). Helping Students Become Independent

https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/sr/#content
 Self-Monitoring Systems to Improve Behavior Outcomes for Students With Comorbid Academic and Behavior Difficulties | 16

Lemons, C., Sinclair, A., Gesel, S., Gandhi, A., & Danielson, L. (2019). Integrating intensive intervention into
special education services: Guidance for special education administrators. Journal of Special Education
Leadership, 32(1), 29-38.

Looney, K., DeQuinzio, J. A., & Taylor, B. A. (2018). Using self-monitoring and differential reinforcement of low
rates of behavior to decrease repetitive behaviors: A case study. Behavioral Interventions, 33(3), 251–259.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1517

Menzies, H., Lane, K, & Lee, J. (2006). Self-monitoring strategies for use in the classroom: A promising practice
to support productive behavior for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Beyond Behavior, 27-
35.

Milner, H. R., Cunningham, H. B., Delale-O’Connor, L., & Kestenberg, E. G. (2019). Chapter 4: Classroom
Management is about creating a caring environment. In “These kids are out of control”: Why we must
reimagine “Classroom management” for equity (pp. 97–132). essay, Corwin, a SAGE Company.

NASP position statement on home-school collaboration. (2005). Retrieved August 14, 2022, from https://
www.casponline.org/pdfs/pdfs/nasppp3.pdf

Nelson, N. (2019). Does self-monitoring lead to more independence and better academic and executive skills?
[Order No. 13865187]. Western Illinois University.

Peterson, L. D., Young, K. R., Salzburg, C. L., West, R. P., & Hill, M.(2006). Using self-management procedures
to improve classroom social skills in multiple general education settings. Education and Treatment of
Children, 29(1).

Pinkelman, S. E., & Horner, R. (2017). Improving implementation of function-based interventions: Self-
monitoring, data collection, and data review. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19, 228–38.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300716683634

Rafferty, L. A. (2010). Step-by-step: Teaching students to self-monitor. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 43(2),
50–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005991004300205

Robinson, E. L., & Fine, M. J. (1994). Developing collaborative home–school relationships. Preventing School
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 39(1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/104598
8x.1994.9944944

Sayeski, K., & Brown, M. (2014). Developing a classroom management plan using a tiered approach.
TEACHING Exceptional Children, 47(2), 119-127.

Sheridan, S. M., Witte, A. L., Holmes, S. R., Wu, C. R., Bhatia, S. A., & Angell, S. R. (2017). The efficacy of
Conjoint Behavioral Consultation in the home setting: Outcomes and mechanisms in rural communities.
Journal of School Psychology, 62, 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2017.03.005

Vanderbilt, A (2005). Designed for teachers: How to implement self-monitoring in the classroom. Beyond
Behavior, 15, 21–24.

Webber, J., Scheuermann, B., McCall, C., & Coleman, M. (1993). Research on self-monitoring as a behavior
management technique in special education classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 14(2), 38-56.