Students with emotional and/or behavioral disabilities (EBD) experience some of the greatest challenges among students with disabilities (Kern, Hilt-Panahon, & Sokol, 2009). These students with EBD need access to behavioral support throughout the entire academic setting in order to make progress (Gable et al., 2012), yet few actually receive the support needed due to inadequate teacher training (Billingsley et al., 2006; Simpson et al., 2011). One research-based strategy with a strong evidence base for supporting students with behavioral challenges across educational contexts is function-based interventions (FBI; Lane, Umbreit, & Beebe-Frankenberger, 1999). Although FBI has demonstrated great effectiveness as a practitioner-implemented strategy, no known studies have embedded self-advocacy skills enabling students to independently seek support based on their specific behavioral function and replacement behavior. Providing students with or at risk for EBD with instruction on how to self-advocate their needs to teachers and request specific need-based support has the potential for improving self-advocacy skills and promoting general education access. This study evaluated the effects of a function-based self-advocacy (FBSA) intervention, which provided systematic and explicit instruction to three students with or at risk for EBD on how to self-advocate their needs in regard to behavioral support, based on the function of their behavior. Using a multiple probe across participants design (Horner & Baer, 1978), participants' problem behaviors and replacement behaviors were measured to determine effectiveness of the FBSA strategy. A visual analysis of results showed a functional relation between FBSA and reduction of problem behaviors. There was also an increase in replacement behaviors upon implementation of FBSA training. Additionally, a descriptive analysis of teachers' response to students' request for replacement behaviors, and students' ability to complete steps to self-advocate needs indicated an increase in the number of times a response was emitted or steps were completed across both primary and generalization settings. Implications for practice and suggestions for future research are discussed. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]