A Reply to Snider
- 1 May 1987
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Learning Disability Quarterly
- Vol. 10 (2) , 153-156
- https://doi.org/10.2307/1510222
Abstract
We appreciate Snider's willingness to allow us to respond to her critique of our self-monitoring research. Because some of her concerns have been addressed to us previously by others, we are pleased to take this opportunity to clarify our stance regarding the value of self-monitoring of attention. Specifically, we are going to respond to six areas of Snider's article: (a) the educational relevance of current theoretical conceptualizations of attention, (b) the issue of improving attentional versus academic behavior, (c) the type of student for whom self-monitoring of attention is most appropriate, (d) the educational relevance of the academic productivity effects found in our studies, (e) issues relating to use of single-subject designs, and (f) the importance of self-monitoring accuracy.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Self-Recording of Attention by Learning Disabled Students in the Regular ClassroomJournal of Learning Disabilities, 1984
- Reactive Effects of Self-Assessment and Self-Recording on Attention to Task and Academic ProductivityLearning Disability Quarterly, 1982
- Self-monitoring of on-task behavior with learning-disabled children: current studies and directionsExceptional Education Quarterly, 1981
- The effect of reinforcement and verbal rehearsal on selective attention in learning-disabled childrenJournal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1980
- The Role of Nonspecific Factors in the Task Performance of Learning Disabled ChildrenJournal of Learning Disabilities, 1977
- Verbal rehearsal and selective attention in children with learning disabilities: A developmental lagJournal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1976