A Single-Subject Study of a Technology-Based Self-Monitoring Intervention
Vogelgesang, Kari L.; Bruhn, Allison L.; Coghill-Behrends, William L.; Kern, Amanda M.; Troughton, Leonard C. W. (2016). Journal of Behavioral Education, v25 n4 p478-497. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1120160
-
examining3Students, grade5
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2024
- Practice Guide (findings for SCORE IT (self-monitoring app))
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a SCD design where the independent variable is manipulated by the researcher, each outcome is measured systematically over time by multiple assessors with a sufficient number of assessment points and inter-assessor agreement, but there are an insufficient number of phases and/or assessments per phase to meet without reservations.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please download findings data here.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 67%
Male: 33% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Midwest
-
Race White 100% -
Ethnicity Not Hispanic or Latino 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in an elementary school located in a Midwestern school district in the United States. The study includes three fifth-grade students within one math class who had or were at risk for ADHD and were exhibiting low rates of academic engagement in a general education environment.
Study sample
All three students were 11-year-olds in the fifth grade and had or were at risk for ADHD. One student was a White male and two of the students were Middle Eastern females. One of the students had a 504 plan to provide accommodations for attention deficits.
Intervention Group
The study evaluates the effectiveness of SCORE IT, an iPad application for self-monitoring in the classroom. The students used SCORE IT to rate their behavior every 10 minutes during a 45-60 minute math class. After each student rated their behavior, the teacher used SCORE IT to rate the student's behavior. The intervention as implemented in this study lasted six sessions for each student. The study included a maintenance phase. Two weeks after the conclusion of the intervention, researchers returned to the classroom to collect maintenance data. At this time, the teacher stated the two female students were no longer using SCORE IT as she felt they no longer needed it to maintain high engagement. The male student continued to use SCORE IT; however, interval length (i.e., time between prompts for monitoring) was increased to 15 minutes. Follow-up data were collected at 2–4 weeks after the final intervention phase ended. At the last two follow-up sessions (i.e., 3 and 4 weeks), the male student was monitoring only two behaviors on 20-minute intervals.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group for single-case designs. The baseline condition consisted of business-as-usual classroom procedures during the participants' math class.
Support for implementation
The researchers held training sessions with the students and the teacher before the implementing the intervention. They researchers shared examples of and non-examples of the desired classroom behaviors and modeled them for the students. Researchers also demonstrated use of the SCORE IT app and allowed the participants time to practice and ask questions.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).