Running Head: SELF-REGULATION OF BEHAVIOR

Tools for the Toolbox:

Helping Students Self-Regulate their Behavior

Amy Cattabriga EDU 690 University of New England April 2013

Self-Regulation of Behavior ABSTRACT At the beginning of every school year, teachers plan for the management of student behaviors in the classroom. They develop a set of classroom rules, hone routines for daily tasks and develop a consequence hierarchy. The question is, can students be taught how to manage their own behavior? The purpose of this study was to develop a core, comprehensive classroom management plan to assist both special and general education teachers in managing challenging behaviors. Working with a small self-contained classroom of students who struggle with their behavior, a system of multi-tiered supports was developed to help students distinguish between desirable and undesirable behaviors and learn to make the right choices in and outside of the classroom. By giving each student the individual support that they need, along with clear specific goals, teachers can impart the skills students need to learn to self-regulate their behavior.

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 1: PROBLEM STATEMENT AND CONTEXT ------------------------------------------ 3 Rationale for the Study ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 Primary Research Questions ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 Hypothesis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ------------------------------------------------------------------ 6 What is Self-Regulation ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 The Development of Self-Regulation ------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Self-Regulation in the Classroom ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8 Self-Regulation: A 3-Teired Model -------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 Research Design ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 Data Collection Plan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 Sample Selection ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 14 Instruments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 17 Data Presentation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 17 Discussion of Findings ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21 CHAPTER 5: ACTION PLAN----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Limitations of the Study ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 Further Research------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27 REFERENCES ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 APPENDICES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 29 Appendix A: Teacher Survey ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29 Appendix B: Original Behavior Slip ------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 Appendix C: New Behavior Slip ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 32

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 1: PROBLEM STATEMENT AND CONTEXT

Rationale for the Study
Imagine a typical elementary school classroom. One where some students are working quietly at their desks, while others gather around the teacher for additional academic support. A few of the students may be pulled out of the classroom to work on skills. Are there any students not working? Are they making noise, in an otherwise quiet classroom? Are they a distraction to their peers? Why is it that some children have such a difficult time controlling their behavior in the classroom? Student self-regulation, or the act of controlling one's emotions, attentions and cognitive processes, is something teachers must deal with on a day-to-day basis. Research suggests that teachers can help students who struggle with behavior by providing an organized classroom (Willingham, 2011). Moreover, as crucial as effective classroom management is to teaching and student learning, it is one of the most frequent cited reasons for leaving the field of teaching (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). Students with good self-regulation skills are more likely to succeed in the classroom they are more likely to have age-appropriate social and emotional functioning, with a good attitude toward learning. It is an early indicator of reading and math proficiency and the association between self-regulation and academics continues throughout a student's school career (Willingham, 2011). The contributing factors towards a child's development of self-regulation skills are numerous genetics, parenting styles and adult interactions all play a role. There is one thing teachers can do to help students improve upon the skills they enter the classroom with: effective classroom management. 3

Self-Regulation of Behavior The purpose of this study was to develop a core, comprehensive classroom management plan to assist both special and general education teachers in managing challenging behaviors. Teachers need to be able to move beyond trying to "manage" behaviors, instead addressing them head on to identify ways to transform the maladaptive behavior into something appropriate and effective for students (Sayeski & Brown, 2011).

Primary Research Questions

Several new topics, methods and questions surfaced during the reading that prompted a shift in topic from learning self-regulation through modeling to an evaluation of student selfregulation as impacted by classroom management. It was the contention of this study that a multi-tiered model of support would allow teachers to teach such skills without negatively affecting academic instruction. The initial purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a multi-tiered model of support on the development and growth of student self-regulation. An analysis of the trends of student behaviors was necessary to identify where the students fell among the three levels of behavioral supports. For example, some students may be able to regulate their behavior at Tier 1, within a well-structured classroom while others need the additional, individualized or intense supports of Tiers 2 and 3 to succeed. A closer investigation of the model raised the question of whether or not it could be generalized between the different types of classrooms. For example, communicating clear rules is a practice many teachers can implement so that students may know what is expected of them in the classroom. More individualized supports, such as modifying academics or support groups may only be feasible in small, self-contained classrooms over general education classes.

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Hypothesis
The prediction for this study is that students exposed to a multi-tiered model of behavioral supports will better regulate their own behavior.

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

The ability to self-regulate, or self manage, one's thinking, emotions and behavior is necessary for success in school, work and life. Like many other regulatory functions, the ability to control one's actions requires intentional use, or practice, before it can become automatic. Children who engage in this process of automatic regulation, called internalization, learn more and go further in their education then their non self-regulating peers (Florez, 2011). The ability to regulate behavior enables students to assume a greater involvement in assessing, directing and evaluating their own performances in their day to day activities, including academics and social domains (Carter, Lane, Crnobori, Bruhn & Oakes, 2011). As students progress through school, they are expected to become more autonomous and independent, assuming a more prominent role in their own education and communicating their strengths and weaknesses. Students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) tend to lack the combination of skills, knowledge and beliefs that enable a person to engage in goal-directed, self-regulated behaviors (Carter, et al., 2011).

What is Self-Regulation
By nature, human beings react to any given situation with a rapid, automatic response. This automatic response may not be the one an individual, upon closer examination of the situation, wants to make. When we inhibit that automatic response and choose one better suited to the situation the process is called self-regulation or self-management (Willingham, 2011). It is a set of complicated processes that allow human beings to respond appropriately to their environment (Florez, 2011). Self-regulation is like a thermostat for behavior. A thermostat senses and measures temperature and compares its reading to a preset threshold. If the reading 6

Self-Regulation of Behavior deviates from the threshold, the thermostat turns either the heating or the cooling system on or off (as cited in Florez, 2011). Children must learn to evaluate a situation or event, compare it to what they already know (the threshold) and react accordingly. Children tend to learn the foundational skills for self-regulation during their first five years of life (Florez, 2011). They must control their emotions, attention and other cognitive processes as well as their behavior in order to be successful academically and socially (Willingham, 2011). The process requires intentional decisions, such as the decision not to push a fellow student. Thus, self-regulation also requires active processes. For example, once the decision not to push a classmate has been made, a student might take steps to prevent it from happening, such as placing their hands in their pockets. Self-regulation also monitors the conditions to maintain attention towards a given task. As children age they learn what activities are easy for them to attend to and which ones require more effort (Florez, 2011). Willingham (2011) describes it as the ability to delay gratification or "to persist in a task that is unrewarding in anticipation of a greater reward in the future" (p23).

The Development of Self-Regulation

Success in self-regulation may be in part due to genetics a child can inherit a propensity toward impulsivity or self-regulation from their parents. Like other inherited traits, selfregulation is subject to environmental factors. Studies do show that a child's early attachment to caregivers does influence their beliefs, expectations about themselves, and a more general understanding of the world (Kim-Spoon, Haskett, Longo & Nice, 2012) No matter what the predisposition, the nature of the home and parenting practices play a large role in a child's development of self-regulatory skills, particularly emotional and cognitive support. Children appear to be more likely to develop self-regulation skills in homes that are well structured, with 7

Self-Regulation of Behavior consistent rules. Studies indicate that students who receive meaningful praise, affection and encouragement from parents at a young age are more likely to develop strong self-regulatory skills. Intellectual stimulation and resources and parent-supported autonomy also play a role in the development of self-regulation (Willingham, 2011). Well-regulated children can respond to experiences with a wide variety of socially acceptable responses as well as inhibit their behavior (Kim-Spoon et al., 2012). Conversely, children who are maltreated, and have been raised in homes with a poor quality of attachment, lack of warmth and a limited discussion of emotions are more likely to have difficulties inhibiting their behavior. Empirical evidence suggests that poor quality care giving is related to negative emotions (Kim-Spoon et al., 2012). Many misbehaviors, such as fighting, teasing and breaking rules, are associated with negative emotions (Willingham, 2011). Motivation is also important in the development of students' self-regulation. When students are motivated they are less likely to engage in inappropriate behaviors (Anderman & Anderman, 2010). Students do not always choose to be at school or to participate in a particular learning activity so the ability to regulate emotions in the classroom is highly important (Fried, 2011). It is particularly important that student misbehaviors be redirected during the elementary school years, before the pattern becomes ingrained and more difficult to eradicate.

Self-Regulation in the Classroom

Self-regulation skills are portable; that is, they can be utilized by students in multiple settings to promote generalized outcomes to improve both academic outcomes and sociobehavioral skill sets (Carter, et al. 2011). They can be readily taught and are often addressed by interventions, with multiple components that address other intervention strategies, such as social skills training and anger management. 8

Self-Regulation of Behavior The first few years of school are critical for a student's successful development, not only because they provide the academic base upon which all other skills are built. In preschool, kindergarten and first grade students learn how to navigate the school environment. They must meet the expectations of adults outside of their own family and learn to work with peers (Menzies & Lane, 2011). How teachers behave towards their students is crucial to student self-regulation of behavior in the classroom. When students identified as likely to impulsive and inappropriate are assigned to teachers who are over controlling, imposing their own learning agenda on students, or who are detached from their students they are more likely to be off task than students paired with teachers who are sensitive, positive and warm towards students. Additionally, much like in the home, classrooms that are organized - with consistent classroom management and where autonomy is encouraged - can help students with poor self-regulation skills learn to manage their own behavior (Willingham, 2011). Furthermore, students who feel emotionally and academically supported by their teacher are more likely to use self-regulation and their perception of teacher support has a direct effect on their motivation in the classroom (Fried, 2011). A classroom environment that presents opportunities for meditation and mindfulness can help enhance the development of student's self-regulation (Fried, 2011). When teachers are mindful of the effects of negative emotions on a student's ability to self-regulate, correcting impulsive actions with a calm, warm redirection, the student is more likely to try to prevent further impulsive acts (Willingham, 2011).

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Self-Regulation: A 3-Teired Model

Historically, school systems have employed the "wait-to-fail" approach when it comes to dealing with student behaviors (Saeki, Jimerson, Earhart, Hart, Renshaw, Singh & Stewart, 2011). Often, a disproportionate amount of class time will be spent on the misbehaving students, rather than on learning. However, early identification and interventions for students for students who display difficulties with self-regulation can remedy this situation. School wide positive behavior intervention and support (SWPBIS) programs offer a continuum of interventions that are systematically applied to students based on their level of need. Typically, this continuum of interventions has three levels of support: primary, secondary and tertiary. A primary level of support is applied to all students. At the secondary level, students at a low risk for or who are beginning to experience behavior difficulties receive supplemental interventions. Students who are considered high risk or who are experience serious difficulties managing their behavior receive specialized and intensive intervention at the tertiary level of the continuum (Benner, Nelson, Sanders & Ralston, 2012). This is the fundamental core of a tiered model: the severity of student behavior is matched with the appropriate intervention level (Saeki, et al. 2011). It is assumed that if the student shows an inadequate response to the best intervention available and feasible then the child can and should be eligible for additional assistance, such as more intense or specialized interventions (Gresham, 2007). When using a three tiered support model in a classroom a teacher must look at their instructional practices, rules and procedures and overall classroom climate (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). From there the three tiers of classroom management can be created. Tier 1 is preventative classroom management. This is where instructional strategies are implemented to increase practice opportunities and provide immediate academic feedback

10

Self-Regulation of Behavior (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). Such instructional strategies may include graphic organizers, flow charts - anything that clarifies directions and expectations. Well-designed and clearly communicated rules should also be introduced. A student's failure to make gains at tier one may be indicative of a need for tier two. In tier 2, it is necessary to implement strategies that are more specific in order to teach the behavioral curriculum. This can include positive reinforcement systems, a token economy and rule checklists. Tier 2 may also require the introduction of surface management techniques to deal with the minor behavior infractions that arise in day-to-day classroom activities (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). Planned ignoring and nonverbal signals fall into the realm of surface management. Much like tier two, tier three consists of specific interventions but they are more intensive and individualized for the particular student. Tier 3 begins with a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA). The FBA is tailored for a specific student and seeks to answer the questions: "Why is the student behaving like this?" and "What socially acceptable behavior can we teach to address the same need?" (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). As the FBA is so individualized, it can only be used for the student it was created for. Generally, a student who needs Tier 3 supports is more difficult to teach desired behaviors because the student is not exhibiting the behaviors with any frequency or they did not possess them in the first place. Such students will need intensive social skills instruction (Sayeski & Brown, 2011). This includes specific skills such as alternatives to aggression, dealing with feelings and stress and negotiating interpersonal communications, such as a joining a group. Effective instruction and clear expectations can go a long way to helping students learn to self-regulate their behavior and navigate successful through their academic careers. Without solid behavioral supports, some students lack the necessary road maps to develop these desirable

11

Self-Regulation of Behavior skills. A tiered model of behavioral support will allow each student to receive the levels of support appropriate for their individual needs.

12

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The purpose of this study was to determine if multi-tiered levels of behavioral supports helped students learn to self-regulate their behaviors in a school setting. The two-part data collection began with an analysis of the trends of student behavior before and after implementation of the model. Trends were analyzed before model implementation to determine what level of support would benefit individual students. A second analysis of the trends, four weeks into the study, was done to see the effect of the multiple levels of support on student behavior. The second part of the data collection process was a survey distributed to teachers to determine the feasibility of implementing a multi-tiered model of support in self-contained and general education classrooms. The idea of a multi-tiered system of behavioral supports was based on the Response to Intervention framework. The underlying assumption of RTI is that when teachers apply effective instructional practices most students will make satisfactory academic gains while others will need additional supports. When applied to the concept of behavior, appropriate behavioral supports should enable the majority of students to behave within classroom norms. The survey questions were designed to ascertain how much of the model classroom teachers were already using in their day to day practices, as well as what supports they felt were feasible to use in their own classroom. The questions were broken down into three sections, one for each tier, and consisted of both an opened ended questions and the chance to choose all the responses that applied to each individual question.

13

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Data Collection Plan

Behavior trends were determined using the information collected from the behavior slips. Behaviors were broken down into five categories, positive, physical, verbal, defiant and other (volume control, etc.). The volume of behaviors was examined as a classroom, rather than from individual students. This was done to protect the identities of the individual students. Additionally, each of the involved students displayed similar behaviors in the classroom, making it unnecessary to examine them individually. The data collected on student behavior at the start of the program was taken from the behavior slips that were being used in the classroom at the time, a general 15 point system that had been designed several years before. The second set of behavioral data was taken from the new, Tier 2 slips, which had been individualized with student goals. Responses to survey questions were divided by the type of classroom each teacher worked in special education (self-contained) and general education classrooms, which included the inclusion classroom teacher. The answers were analyzed to determine any differences between the classroom management styles of the different types of classrooms.

Sample Selection
A sample of 10 students and 4 teachers participated in the multi-tiered model of classroom management. The study took place in the Life, Learning Educational Achievement Program (LLEAP), a small, self-contained classroom for students who struggle with behavior. While the program covers grades K-5, the students are split up by grade level: Kindergarten through second grade are in one classroom and third through fifth in the other. Student diagnoses range from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Pediatric Bipolar Disorder. 14

Self-Regulation of Behavior Each half of the program has one teacher and one paraprofessional. While they are each responsible for their own classroom they often overlap, working with both teachers and students to help all succeed. Additionally, there is a behavioral therapist and a social worker assigned to the program from an outside company both declined to participate in the study. An additional eight teachers participated in only the survey portion of the study, bringing the total number of teachers surveyed to 12. In addition to the four teachers in the LLEAP program, there was a fifth teacher from a self-contained special education classroom and one inclusion Kindergarten teacher. The remaining six teachers worked in general education classrooms and represented grades K-5.

Instruments
The data collected on student behavior at the start of the program was taken from the behavior slips that were being used in the classroom at the time, a general 15 point system that had been designed several years before (Appendix A). Using the data collected, the slips were redesigned to better reflect the individual needs of each student (Appendix B). The day was further broken up into sections, one for the morning and two for the afternoon. By meeting their individual goals students can earn a total of 36 points, 12 in the morning, 18 and 6 in each of the afternoon sections. Furthermore, a section was added for teachers to list any additional interventions used to help the student self-regulate their behavior and the effectiveness of that intervention. A 9-question survey (Appendix C) was developed to determine a snapshot of classroom management strategies in both self-contained and general education classrooms. It consisted of three open-ended questions and six "select all that apply" style questions. The questions covered what supports and practices were currently being implemented in the classroom to where the 15

Self-Regulation of Behavior teachers felt they could improve or what they felt they would add to their repertoire of classroom management techniques.

16

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
Data Presentation
Responses to teacher surveys were compiled in a spreadsheet and analyzed for similarities and differences. Each teacher that participated in the study has a distinct approach to both classroom management and behavior management. However, analysis of survey questions determined some distinct similarities. Of the teachers surveyed, all reported having an organized classroom, with clear communication, established routines and procedures and high student engagement. All those surveyed reported that they engaged in teacher modeling of positive behaviors as well but almost all respondents, 75 percent, felt they needed to improve their use of this technique. Similarly, 75 percent of the teachers who reported to having an organized classroom felt that they could improve upon this and about half the teachers, 58 percent, surveyed thought that they could enhance their communication with students. The similarities in preventative classroom management techniques did not extend to the use of additional behavior supports in the classroom. All of the teachers surveyed reported using a contingency system (loss of privileges, time outs, etc.) to help students understand that a displayed behavior was unacceptable. The majority of teachers reported using a positive reinforcement system or a token economy, 67 percent and 75 percent respectively, in their classrooms. Only the inclusion and special education teachers, 50 percent of those surveyed, reported using changes to academic instruction to help regulate student behavior (Figure 1).

17

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Figure 1. Question 5: Use of Additional Behavioral Supports

Regular Ed Teachers

Special Ed Teachers

Number of Second Tier Behavioral Supports Used

Figure 1: Comparison of the reported use of additional behavioral supports by regular education teachers and special education teachers, in response to question 5 of the teacher survey.

Beyond the use of Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs) and Behavioral Intervention Plans (BIPs) put in place by a behavior specialist none of the regular education teachers surveyed reported that they are currently using any individualized, intensive behavioral supports (Figure 2). One teacher surveyed, an inclusion Kindergarten teacher, reported using individualized social skills instruction and self-monitoring strategies such as "How is your engine running" when her classroom had been assigned a paraprofessional dedicated for such supports. All of the special education teachers reported utilizing support groups, primarily for anger management and social skills instruction. One special education teacher noted that she felt, for her students, "A social skills curriculum is just as important as an academic one". Only the teachers directly involved in the LLEAP program reported using crisis management in their classroom.

18

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Figure 2. Question 7: Use of Individualized Behavioral Supports

Regular Ed Teachers

Special Ed Teachers

Number of Third Tier Behavioral Supports Used

Figure 2: Comparison of the reported use of individualized behavioral supports by regular education teachers and special education teachers, in response to question 7 of the teacher survey.

Student behaviors were observed and documented on the general behavior slip (Appendix B) for the period of one week (five days) prior to the introduction of the Mulit-Tiered Classroom Management program. This data served as a baseline to show the impact of tiered classroom management on student behavior. Behaviors were classified as Positive, Verbal, Physical, Defiant and Other (volume control, etc.) (Figure 3). The most commonly displayed behavior, 37 percent, was verbal outbursts of inappropriate language, threats, etc. About one quarter of observed behaviors, 24 percent, were physical.

19

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Figure 3. Trends in Student Behavior before Program Implementation

Number of Occurances 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Positive Verbal Physical Defiance Other Observed Student Behaviors
Figure 3: The observed trends in student behavior a week prior to program implementation.

Using the redesigned, individualized behavior slips (Appendix C) behaviors were observed and documented for one week (five days) approximately four weeks after the implementation of the tiered program (Figure 4). While acts of verbal aggression increased slightly, by about 8 percent, acts of physical aggression and defiance decreased by 17 percent and 30 percent respectively. After implementation of the program, instances of positive behavior increased by 33 percent.

Figure 4. Trends in Student Behavior after Program Implementation

30 Number of Occurances 25 20 15 10 5 0 Positive Verbal Physical Defiance Other Observed Student Behaviors
Figure 4: Observed trends in student behavior four weeks after program implementation.

20

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Discussion of Findings
Based on the responses to the surveys, Tiers 1 and 2 of program would be feasible to implement in a classroom. Both regular education teachers and special education teachers selfreported the regular use of preventative classroom management techniques such as organization, clear communication and an established set of routines. Regular education teachers were less likely than special education teachers to utilize the additional behavioral supports in their classrooms, particularly those that were more individualized, such as home-school note system. The average regular education teacher surveyed has 25 students in their classroom, compared to special education classrooms, which had an average of eight students. The act of writing regular, personal correspondence with a student's parent or guardian was noted to be "too time consuming" by one teacher. Behavioral supports that can be used as incentives for the majority of students, like a token economy, are feasible for both large and small classrooms. Likewise, intensive behavioral supports were not found in regular education classrooms without the additional support of a paraprofessional. Such supports, like the home-school note system, require more time than the regular education teacher has to devote to one student in a day. Furthermore, students who require such intense behavioral supports have often been referred out of the regular education classroom when the Tier 2 supports prove to be ineffective. Given the smaller classroom setting, low student to teacher ratio and addition of a social worker and counselor; it would be more feasible for a special education program to provide such individualized aid. The five categories of student behavior positive, verbal, physical, defiance and other were observed on a daily basis. There was a correlation between positive behaviors and defiant

21

Self-Regulation of Behavior behaviors, as half of the observed positive behaviors were followed by an act of defiance. In each instance, the students in question knew to remove themselves from a situation where they could not control their behavior but did not notify a teacher that they were leaving the classroom. The results were largely inconclusive. At the end of the four weeks, only two of the observed positive behaviors were accompanied by acts of defiance. The decrease in physical behaviors and the increase in verbal behaviors suggest that verbal outbursts have become a replacement for physical acts of aggression. Using individualized behavior slips each student was able to make progress towards at least one of their three behavior goals. However, due to the limitations of the study (time, etc.) it is difficult to determine exactly what the cause of the fluctuations of the behaviors may have been. Additionally, the increase of verbal behaviors and the lack of change in other, undesirable behaviors could be attributed to a lack of consistency in the presentation of the model.

22

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 5: ACTION PLAN

Limitations of the Study
There were several limitations to the study. First would be the time constraints. While the trends show that student behavior was impacted favorably by the introduction of the tiered model, the limits of the duration of the course made a long-term study of the sample unfeasible. Ideally, the course of a full school year with assessments conducted during the first and last weeks of the year would better illustrate the degree of impact the model has on student behaviors. There was no contingency plan for the model, either. Due to circumstances beyond anyone's control, there was a revolving door of substitutes in the classroom for a period of almost 2 weeks in the middle of the study. While the remaining teachers did what they could to remain consistent with model, many of the substitutes had difficulty adapting in the appropriate time frame. Implementing the model school-wide could correct for this problem, as could having a small subset of substitutes trained to work within the multi-tiered model as well as with students with behavioral struggles. The small sample size was an additional limitation to the study. The small class size and high teacher to student ratio made the LLEAP program an ideal trial classroom for the study, but responses to the questionnaire suggest that implementing the model in a more traditional classroom with only one teacher and more than 25 students would require further studies. The study also only considered the influence of the teachers and classroom environments on student behaviors. A more thorough study would consider additional factors such as the home environment and parenting techniques. 23

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Further Research
After exploring and evaluating behavior management methods through teacher surveys and trends in student behavior it has been determined that further research is necessary. While a correlation between behavior management techniques and student behavior were explored, the relationship causality cannot be determined with the current data. Due to time constraints, it is not possible to tell if improved student self-regulation of behavior is a result of the introduction of the model. Further study of the Multi-Tiered behavior management model and its impact on student self-regulation of behavior would determine the effectiveness of the program in a small, selfcontained classroom such as the LLEAP program. Additionally, the study should be implemented in a regular education classroom, with a higher student to teacher ratio, to determine if Tiers 2 and 3 are feasible in an already demanding classroom schedule. A yearlong study of multiple classrooms, of both natures, is necessary to gather the quantity and quality of data required to determine if the Multi-Tiered model has an impact on the self-regulation of behavior. To ensure validity it would be most effective to evaluate three to four teachers using the Multi-Tiered model to teach self-regulation. Teacher surveys, reflective journals and classroom observations, either monthly or quarterly, would increase the study's validity. It would likewise be effective to evaluate the degree of implementation of the model as well. One teacher could implement Tiers 1 and 2, for instance while another utilizes all three to show how feasible the model is. A control group consisting of at least three classrooms where only Tier 1, basic classroom management, would be necessary as well. Parental practices are crucial to the role of self-regulation of behavior. Parents and others in the home are the earliest influences on child behavior. Therefore parental attachment, warmth

24

Self-Regulation of Behavior and structure of the home play a key role in the development of strong self-regulation skills (Willingham, 2011). Profiling parents to acquire the parenting methods and information on the home environment would inform the results. Determining the effectiveness of a Multi-Tiered model of behavior management would in turn determine if the investment of time, energy and school funds is worth it. If it were found that said model fosters the development of self-regulation skills in students then it would undoubtedly be beneficial to students' long term and would alleviate the struggles many teachers have with balancing the academic curriculum with managing student behaviors. The benefits of student self-regulation are innumerable: academics would improve, students would be more likely to develop lasting relationships with peers and classroom management would become easier. A thorough study of the multi-tiered model would generate a clear understanding, supported by statistical data, of its impact on student self-regulatory practices. At the end of a long-term evaluation and a comparison of varying degrees of implementation would determine exactly what level of implementation is most effective in both regular education and selfcontained classrooms. The next step in the study would be to communicate with administration and teachers, informing them of the study and recruiting applicable classrooms. Ideally, teachers who have already implemented tier 1 to some degree and are still struggle with classroom management and student behaviors would be used for the study. Four classrooms that are both of the self contained and regular education variety (8 classrooms altogether) would provide 8 teachers, 8 paraprofessionals (based on at least 2 paraprofessionals per self-contained program) and a minimum of 140 students (based on at least 10 students per self-contained classroom and 25

25

Self-Regulation of Behavior students per regular education classroom. This would allow for a substantially larger sample size pool than that which was available for the initial study. Upon the completion of the year-long study and analysis of the data, a report would be generated and shared with all cooperating administrations and teachers so that they could make an informed choice about the implementation, or degree of implementation of a multi-tiered model of behavior management.

26

Self-Regulation of Behavior

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS
The students populating today's schools are incredibly diverse. They come from differing cultures and have different learning styles. They arrive at school with differing levels of emotional and social maturity. One size fits all instruction, both academically and socially, will inevitably leave some students out in the cold. Teachers can and must create a user-friendly environment that challenges students to become better, well-rounded members of society without encouraging frustration. Much like with academic interventions, the introduction of a multi-tiered system of supports does seem to have some effect on student's self-regulation of behavior. By giving each student the individual support that they need, along with clear specific goals, teachers can impart the skills students need to learn to self-regulate their behavior. Without that solid core of behavioral supports in the classroom, students do not have the necessary guideposts to learn, practice and develop desirable skills.

27

Self-Regulation of Behavior

REFERENCES
Anderman, E. M. & Anderman, L. H. (2010). Classroom motivation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. Benner, G. J., Nelson, J. R., Sanders, E. A. & Ralston, N. C. (2012). Behavior intervention for students with externalizing behavior problems: primary level standard protocol. Exceptional Children, 78:2, 181-198. Carter, E. W., Lane, K. L., Crnobori, M., Bruhn, A. L. & Oakes, W. P. (2011). SelfDetermination Interventions for students with and at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders: mapping the knowledge base. Behavioral Disorders, 36, 100-116. Florez, I. R. (2011). Developing young children's self-regulation through everyday experiences. Young Children, 46-51. Fried, L. (2011). Teaching teachers about emotion regulation in the classroom. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 117-127. Gresham, F. M. (2007). Response to intervention and emotional and behavioral disorders. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32, 2124-222. Kim-Spoon, J., Haskett, M. E., Longo, G. S., Nice, R. (2012). Longitudinal study of selfregulation, positive parenting and adjustment problems among physically abused children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36, 95-107 Menzies, H. M. & Lane, K. L. (2011). Using self-regulation strategies and functional assessment-based interventions to provide academic and behavioral support to students at risk within three-tiered models of prevention. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth. 55:4, 181-191. Saeki, E. Jimerson, S. R., Earhart, J. & Hart, S. R. (2011). Response to intervention (RtI) in the social, emotional and behavioral domains: current challenges and emerging possibilities. Contemporary School Psychology, 15, 43-52. Sayeski, K. L. & Brown, M. R. (2011). Developing a classroom management plan using a tiered approach. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44:1, 8-17. Willingham, D. T. (2011). Can teachers increase students' self-control? American Educator, 2227.

28

Self-Regulation of Behavior

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Teacher Survey

29

Self-Regulation of Behavior

30

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Appendix B: Original Behavior Slip

31

Self-Regulation of Behavior

Appendix C: New Behavior Slip

32