Running head: CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON- TASK BEHAVIOR 1

Lindsay Hack

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 2

__________________________________________________

Jaye Luke, Ph.D., Advisor, Master of Arts in Education

Academic Programs and Dean of Undergraduate & Graduate Studies

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 3

Literature Review ........................................................................................................................ 5

On-task Behavior ..................................................................................................................... 5

Behavioral Interventions .......................................................................................................... 6

Research Question ................................................................................................................. 14

Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 14

Setting .................................................................................................................................... 14

Social Validity ....................................................................................................................... 18

Results ....................................................................................................................................... 19

Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 21

References ................................................................................................................................. 26

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 4

role of technology in society. This study utilizes the implementation of a contingency cell phone

plan designed to increase on-task behavior. An ABAB design was employed with at-risk,

secondary students receiving special education services in a continuation high school. Three

male students, ages 16-18, with a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)

were selected due to difficulty with on-task behavior. Participants were granted access to their

Key words: on-task, secondary, reinforcement, technology

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 5

On-task behavior is a construct. That is, researchers have defined it differently depending

on their purpose or task (Galton, Hargraves, Comber, Wall & Pell, 1999; Gill & Remedios, 2012;

VandenBerg, 2001). For example, VandenBerg (2001) used on-task behavior to represent

engagement with the learning materials. Engagement indicated that if students were interacting

with the learning materials (e.g., book, graphs, etc.), then they were considered on-task. On-task

behavior could include using the materials appropriately along with engaging in task-related

This range of behaviors clarifies the importance of the on-task construct. The scope of

on-task behavior is often correlated with academic success (Heering & Wilder, 2006). For

high school with a diploma remain unemployed, their chances of incarceration and dependency

on social services escalate dramatically (Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008). For at-risk

students, improving their GPA and decreasing their risk for dropout helps prepare them to be

successful in school as well as in their professional life. Therefore, it is important to help

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 6

Teaching on-task behaviors to students is a well-researched topic and a myriad of interventions

to improve on-task behavior have been successful for various student populations.

Many studies have identified interventions that increase on-task behavior for students in

the general education and special education settings. Research has shown that interventions have

been proven effective for students in whole class settings as well as for individual needs (Allday

& Pakurar, 2007; Appleton, Christenson, & Furlong, 2008; Bedesem & Dierker, 2014; Bonus &

Riordan, 1998; Calderhead, Filter, & Albin, 2006; DuPaul & Weyandt, 2006; Galton, Hargraves,

behavior during the intervention phase, suggesting that students are more likely to demonstrate

on-task behavior when presented with a positive antecedent event (Allday & Pakurar, 2007). For

many students a warm, welcoming teacher provides students the confidence and inspiration to

meet academic expectations.

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 7

arrangements. Teachers use seating to diffuse social tension, encourage academic support

among peers and foster productive learning environments. For example, Bonus and Riordan

(1998) investigated the use of specific seating arrangements as an intervention to increase on-

task behavior. Findings from this study demonstrated that dependent upon the type or format of

instruction, whole class seating arrangements were influential in increasing on-task behaviors

(Bonus & Riordan, 1998). Teachers can implement the use of varying seating arrangements;

however, this strategy does not ensure on-task behavior.

reinforcer given the group behavior. Dependent group contingencies provide reinforcement to

the whole group dependent upon on or a few students meeting the target behavior. Heering and

dependent group contingency systems indicated extremely positive results. That is, on-task

behavior rose from a mean of 36% to 83% in a third grade classroom and from 50% to 85% in a

fourth grade classroom. Follow-up levels conducted during the study continued to show that

high levels of on-task behavior were maintained with a mean of over 90%. This research points

to the importance of group contingency systems and their effectiveness within the classroom.

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 8

individualized interventions must be implemented for students who are identified at-risk or have

severe behavior needs.

For students with more challenging or prominent behaviors, identifying the function of

the behavior is imperative for choosing the appropriate intervention. For secondary students, the

function of the behavior is often to avoid tasks or a paucity of executive functioning skills.

Many students who engage in off-task behavior due to learning challenges have found success in

interspersed requests or stimulus variation of instructional tasks (Calderhead, Filter, & Albin,

2006). For example, a student with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) who

task, becomes a conditioned reinforcer, thereby increasing on-task behavior (Skinner, 2002).

Along with interspersing modified tasks within an assignment, many teachers find allowing

students with behavior challenges to choose an assigned academic activity is an effective

intervention.

Choice-making interventions provide students with teacher approved task options within

an area of study. For example, a student who finds writing aversive may choose to make a

picture collage instead. The student avoids the act of writing, but illustrates mastery of the

concepts in a different way. Students who are allowed choice making within their classroom

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 15

minutes, including passing periods. Students may use their cell phones during brunch and lunch.

If a student uses their cell phones during instructional time, they are instructed to put the device

away. If a student refuses or uses the phone again, parent contact will be made and additional

consequences may ensue. If the behavior becomes habitual, office discipline referrals are given

and severe consequences may be warranted.

Three males ages 16-18, with a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,

combined type, participated in this study. Each participant was assigned a pseudonym to ensure

Alfonso was 17 years old and has received Special Education services since 2011. Since

attending the current school, Alfonso had earned 12 credits and is not on track for graduation.

Austin was 18 years old and has received special education services since 2006. He is on

track for graduation in June of 2016.

Jacob was 16 years old and has received Special Education services since 2014. Jacob

has earned 83 credits and is on track to return to his comprehensive high school for his senior

year.

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 16

The materials used for this study were the participant's cell phone, data collection form,

timer, teacher survey, and a participant self-assessment. The cell phone is the property of and

date of observation, five rows indicating the start and end time of the observation period and five

columns representing each day of the week. The researcher used an online timer with an

automated alert set for five-minute intervals.

Direct observation of the on-task behavior was observed at least four days a week using a

the participant did not use or look at their phone, the researcher noted the observation with the

behavior, completion of the data collection sheet, and use of the online timer.

To investigate the impact of a contingency cell phone plan as a reinforcer for on-task

student behavior, the research team developed a study using an ABAB design. Throughout all

phases of the study, participants were instructed to place their cell phone in the top left hand

corner of their desk or table. During baseline, participants were observed in five-minute

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 17

cell phone use by the participant. The school policy of no cell phones allowed during class was

enforced.

During the intervention phases of the study, a contingency use plan was in place.

Participants were instructed that if they demonstrated on-task behavior for five minutes, defined

for this study as not looking at or touching their cell phone, they could use their cell phone for a

two-minute period at the conclusion of each five-minute interval. Participants who did not

demonstrate on-task behavior during the five-minute interval did not have access to their cell

phone during the two-minute interval and it remained at the top left corner of their desk. Each

least three stable data points.

During the data collection process, a second researcher collected data for 25% of the

sessions. The second researcher was trained on how on-task behavior was defined for this study,

how to complete the data collection sheet and use of the online timer. The second researcher

collected data independently of the other researcher. Interobserver agreement was calculated by

dividing the total number of agreements by the total number of agreements plus disagreements

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 18

behavior with a rate of 95% accuracy. Jacob had a mean IOA of 95% as well.

For 25% of sessions, an independent observer checked to see that the primary researcher

consistently implemented the cell-phone contingency. The second researcher determined

procedural fidelity by dividing the total number of correctly implementations by the number of

opportunities to implement the procedure and multiplied by 100 to determine percentage. The

contingency intervention was implemented correctly with 100% accuracy.

YES NO

3. Would appropriate cell phone use strategies be beneficial in your classroom?

YES NO

Overall, teachers agreed that cell phones were a distraction in the classroom. Of the 12

cell phone use during instructional time was ineffective. When asked if appropriate cell phone

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 19

entering the initial baseline and after the final intervention. Participants were instructed on the

terms used in the questions and provided with an opportunity to ask questions about the self-

assessment survey. The three questions were:

1. Does use of your cell phone distract you during class?

YES NO

2. Do you accomplish more when your cell phone is not being used?

YES NO

The impact of a cell phone contingency plan on on-task behavior is depicted in Figures 1,

on the x-axis.

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 20

Baseline 1 was 28% (range 20-40%). During Intervention 1 his average of on-task behavior

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 21

an average of 84% (range 60-100) of time on-task.

Intervention 1 his average of on-task behavior increased to 64% (range 20-100%) (see Figure 2).

time on-task.

1 was 48% (range 20-60%). During Intervention 1 his average of on-task behavior increased to

Throughout the study participants increased their on-task behavior by 26% to 56% from the

initial baseline to the final intervention phase. These results are comparable to previous studies

on on-task behavior using contingency based systems (Heering & Wilder, 2006). All

participants demonstrated significant improvement of their on-task behavior with the

implementation of the contingency use cell phone plan.

points, Alfonso displayed a more stable trend line which may be explained by his tendency to be

less emotional or impulsive than the other participants. Alfonso has shown to be more

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 22

comparison to the other two participants. Given these personality traits, his trend line could be

attributed to his level of motivation and demonstration of stronger executive functioning skills.

While Alfonso appears to have the least amount of drastic movement amongst data points

compared to the other participants, he displayed the greatest gain in time on-task change from

baseline to intervention over the course of observation has the out of the three participants. This

was an interesting find for the researchers and potentially points to the impact emotional

regulation has on intervention results.

stimulus then either Alfonso or Austin which was apparent in his results.

However, even with fluctuating emotional needs, given the high rate of reinforcement a

cell phone provides, both Austin and Jacob made significant improvement in their rate of on-task

behavior. The value of a cell phone as a reinforcement tool can be seen as conclusive given all

three participants answered positively to this effect in the post intervention student survey. This

he decided the contingency of work production was worth the payoff of cell-phone time.

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 23

phase as this was not the expectation. These three participants have a history of truancy;

therefore, the researchers expected absences to impede the transition between each phase.

However, during the research period, the participants were present for each day of school with

the exception of Alfonso who missed one day. Additionally, the researchers found it interesting

that each participant had a mean of 84% of on-task behavior in the final phase of Intervention.

There is no explanation for this consistency, however it is interesting to note. The survey data

provided the participants post intervention was a significant demonstration in how the

participants were able to identify both the detriment of cell phones as distractors, but also the

cell phone use post work completion proved successful. Given the cell phone is likely the most

highly preferred item of a secondary student at this time, the rate of reinforcement was

significant (Hoffmann, 2014). All three participants indicated that knowing they would have the

opportunity to access their cell phone after work competition was extremely motivating. Thus

student on-task behavior increased by utilizing the cell phone as a tool for reinforcement which

is an easily applicable strategy in the classroom.

The results of this study are an important contribution to current research and practice.

The use of cell-phones in secondary general education and special education classrooms as a

CONTINGENCY CELL PHONE PLAN ON-TASK BEHAVIOR 24

administrative needs by providing an effective, practical, and socially acceptable intervention

strategy.

As students become accustomed to cell phones as a tool, they will have the ability to

utilize cell phones as a tool for implementing free choice activities, for tactile prompting and

eventually for self-management and increasing executive functioning skills. Appropriate cell

phone use strategies could have a significant impact on increasing on-task behavior for

secondary students across settings. As we know from current literature, higher rates of on-task

behavior and student engagement has a positive impact on graduation rates, post-secondary

participating in special education programs. Additionally, teachers and administrators would

have the advantage of providing cell-phone time for expected behavior versus the more common

strategy of removing cell phone use as a punishment. Policy changes allowing use of cell phones

as tools for reinforcement would allow administrators and teachers to implement effective

interventions for all students in the classroom.

Although the data showed positive results, the researchers found limitations with the

study and suggest alterations for future implementation. For future research it is suggested that

increasing the sample size and implementing the intervention across settings would be useful.