Self-regulation strategies are not only effective but also provide two distinct advan-tages over other possible choices. First, self-regulation strategies avoid the “hidden cur-riculum” that is implicit in more behavioral approaches. With self-regulation, students are the agent of change rather than the teacher or another adult figure. The lesson here is one of empowerment—students can independently make changes in their behavior (Graham et al., 1992). For students with learned helplessness and other motivational problems this is an important consideration. Second, and equally important, self-regulation strategies offer a distinct practical advantage over many other approaches.
After the initial data collection and instruction the teacher’s involvement is minimal, because the child is literally running the intervention. The savings in time can be con-siderable in contrast to other approaches. For example, self-regulation strategies do not require teachers to take the time to constantly reinforce behaviors or track points earned through token economies; instead teachers are free to perform other instruction-al duties.
We would stress that although self-regulation strategies are powerful, they are not a panacea. No intervention can claim to be 100% effective for every student. Further, as
Reid (1993) noted, it is important for practitioners to realize that to effectively imple-ment self-regulation teachers must follow both the “letter” and the “spirit” of the procedures outlined above. However, with these caveats in mind, we should em-phasize that because self-regulation strategies can be easily implemented in the class-room and have a demonstrated track record, educators should strongly consider using regulation strategies in their classrooms. Additionally, as we noted earlier, self-regulation strategies are useful in their own right, but they are even more powerful when combined with content-area strategies as a part of the SRSD process.
FINAL THOUGHTS
In closing, we stress that self-regulation does not take place in a vacuum. The environ-ment is a significant factor in self-regulation (e.g., Mace et al., 2001; Schunk, 2001).
Changing the environment can enhance or enable self-regulation (e.g., taking a limited amount of cash prevents overspending) (Mace et al., 2001). Students also may self-regulate their environment to help themselves complete tasks (e.g., finding a place to study that is quiet and free of outside distractions). Providing students with a struc-tured environment and predictable, stable routines is an important prerequisite for self-regulation. Additionally, a stable environment can increase the likelihood of effective self-regulation.
Note also that even in the best possible environment students with LD will probably have some problem with self-regulation. In an environment that is disordered or cha-otic, successful self-regulation is unlikely to occur. Luckily, there are numerous simple, practical, environmental changes that can enhance self-regulation, such as providing students with folders to serve as organizers for assignments, taping prompts to lockers (“Did you remember to bring your book?”), or using prompt cards that list the steps for a task and serve to cue performance. The major point that teachers need to remember is to attend to both self-regulation strategies and to supportive environments.
REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1988). Self-regulation of motivation and action through goal systems. In V. Hamil-ton, G. H. Browder, & N. H. Frijda (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on emotion and motivation (pp. 37–61). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Barkley, R. A. (1998). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Barkley, R. A., Copeland, A. P., & Sivage, C. (1980). A self-control classroom for hyperactive chil-dren. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 10, 75–89.
Broden, M., Hall, R. V., & Mitts, B. (1971). The effects of self-recording on the classroom behavior of two eighth-grade students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 191–199.
DuPaul, G. J., & Stoner, G. (2003). ADHD in the schools: Assessment and intervention strategies (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1992). Helping young writers master the craft: Strategy instruction and self-regulation in the writing process. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1996). Self-regulation and strategy instruction for students who find writing and learning challenging. In C. M. Levy & S. Randall (Eds.), The science of writing:
Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 347–360). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Reid, R. (1992). Developing self-regulated learners. Focus on Excep-tional Children, 24, 1–16.
Hallahan, D. P., Lloyd, J. W., Kosiewicz, M. M., Kauffman, J. M., & Graves, A. W. (1979). Self-monitoring of attention as a treatment for a learning disabled boy’s off-task behavior.
Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 24–32.
Hallahan, D. P., Marshall, K. J., & Lloyd, J. W. (1981). Self-recording during group instruction:
Effects on attention to task. Learning Disability Quarterly, 4, 407–413.
Hallahan, D. P., & Sapona, R. (1983). Self-monitoring of attention with learning disabled children:
Past research and current issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 616–620.
Harris, K. R. (1986). Self-monitoring of attentional behavior versus self-monitoring of productiv-ity: Effects on on-task behavior and academic response rate among learning disabled chil-dren. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 417–423.
Harris, K. R. (1990). Developing regulated learners: The role of private speech and self-instructions. Educational Psychologist, 25, 35–49.
Johnson, L., & Graham, S. (1990). Goal setting and its application with exceptional learners. Pre-venting School Failure, 34, 4–8.
Kanfer, F. H. (1977). The many faces of self-control, or behavior modification changes its focus. In R. B. Stuart (Ed.), Behavioral self-management (pp. 1–48). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Lloyd, J. W., Bateman, D. F., Landrum, T. J., & Hallahan, D. P. (1989). Self-recording of attention versus productivity. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 315–323.
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.
Mace, F. C., Belfiore, P. J., & Hutchinson, J. M. (2001). Operant theory and research on self-regulation. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achieve-ment (pp. 39–65). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Mace, F. C., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1988). Self-monitoring. In J. C. Witt, S. N. Eliott, & F. M. Gres-ham (Eds.), Handbook of behavior therapy in education (pp. 489–522). New York: Plenum Press.
Nelson, R. O., & Hayes, S. C. (1981). Theoretical explanations for reactivity in self-monitoring.
Behavior Modification, 5, 3–14.
Reid, R. (1993). Implementing self-monitoring interventions in the classroom: Lessons from research. Monograph in Behavior Disorders: Severe Behavior Disorders in Youth, 16, 43–54.
Reid, R. (1996). Self-monitoring for students with learning disabilities: The present, the prospects, the pitfalls. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 317–331.
Reid, R. (1999). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effective methods for the classroom.
Focus on Exceptional Children, 32(4), 1–20.
Reid, R., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Self-monitoring of performance. LD Forum, 15, 39–42.
Reid, R., & Harris, K. R. (1993). Self-monitoring of attention versus self-monitoring of perfor-mance: Effects on attention and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 60, 29–40.
Rooney, K. J., Hallahan, D. P., & Lloyd, J. W. (1984). Self-recording of attention by learning dis-abled students in the regular classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 360–364.
Schunk, D. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174.
Schunk, D. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psy-chologist, 25, 71–86.
Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. Zimmerman & D.
H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (pp. 125–151). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Swanson, H. L., Hoskyn, M., & Lee, C. (1999). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. New York: Guilford Press.
Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psy-chology, 89, 397–410.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1–19). New York: Guilford Press.