The influence of fidelity of implementation on the reading outcomes of middle school students experiencing reading difficulties

Remedial and Special Education

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 79-88

  Benner, Gregory J ^a   Nelson, J Ron ^b   Stage, Scott A ^c   Ralston, Nicole C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^c NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

adolescent literacy; direct instruction; instructional fidelity; reading achievement; reading achievement gap; remedial reading; response to intervention; striving readers; treatment fidelity

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650794583     PISSN: 07419325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0741932510361265     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Allinder, R.M., Bolling, R.M., Oats, R.G., & Gagnon, W.A. (2000). Effects of teacher self-monitoring on implementation of curriculum-based measurement and mathematics computation achievement of students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 219-226.
2. Benner, G.J. (2007). The relative impact of cohesive remedial reading instruction on the basic reading skills of students with emotional disturbance and learning disabilities. Journal of Direct Instruction, 7, 1-15.
3. Benner, G.J., Kinder, D., Beaudoin, K.M., & Stein, M. (2005). The effects of the corrective reading decoding program on the basic reading skills and social adjustment of students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Direct Instruction, 5, 67-80.
4. Cook, B.G., Landrum, T.J., Tankersley, M., & Kauffman, J.M. (2003). Bringing research to bear on practice: Effecting evidence-based instruction for students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 26, 345-361.
5. Dane, A.V., & Schneider, B.H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: Are implementation effects out of control? Clinical Psychology Review, 18, 23-45.
6. Engelmann, S., Hanner, S., & Johnson, G. (2002). Corrective reading. Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-Hill.
7. Fox, J. (1991). Regression diagnostics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8. Gersten, R., & Brengelman, S.U. (1996). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: The emerging knowledge base. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 67-74.
9. Hall, G., & Loucks, S. (1977). A developmental model for determining whether the treatment is actually implemented. American Educational Research Journal, 14, 263-276.
10. Hall, G.E., Loucks, S.F., Rutherford, W.L., & Newlove, B.W. (1975). Levels of use of the innovation: A framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 26, 52-56.
11. Hord, S.M., Rutherford, W.L., Huling-Austin, L., & Hall, G.E. (1987). Taking charge of change. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
12. Kaminski, R.A., & Good, R.H., III. (1996). Assessing early literacy skills in a problem-solving model: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. In P. G. Aaron & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading problems: Consultation and remediation (pp. 113-153). New York: Guilford.
13. Lee, J., Grigg, W., & Donahue, P. (2007). The nation's report card: Reading 2007 (NCES 2007-496). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.
14. Lloyd, J., Cullinan, D., Heins, E.D., & Epstein, M.H. (1980). Direct instruction: Effects on oral and written language comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3, 70-76.
15. Marchand-Martella, N., Martella, R.C., Orlob, M., & Ebey, T. (2000). Conducting action research in a rural high school setting using peers as corrective reading instructors for students with disabilities. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 19, 20-30.
16. Martella, R.C., Nelson, J.R., & Marchand-Martella, N.E. (1999). Research methods: Learning to become a critical research consumer. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
17. Mowbray, C.T., Holter, M.C., Teague, G.B., & Bybee, D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement and evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 315-340.
18. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the national reading panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH 00-4754). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
19. National Research Council Committee for a Review of the Evaluation Data on the Effectiveness of NSF-Supported and Commercially Generated Mathematics Curriculum Materials, Mathematical Sciences Education Board, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. (2004). On evaluating curricular effectiveness: Judging the quality of K-12 mathematics evaluations. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
20. O'Donnell, C.L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78, 33-84.
21. Pedhazur, E.J. (1999). Multiple regression in behavioral research (3rd ed.). Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
22. Penuel, W.R., & Means, B. (2004). Implementation variation and fidelity in an inquiry science program: An analysis of GLOBE data reporting patterns. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 294-315.
23. Songer, N.B., & Gotwals, A.W. (2005, April). Fidelity of implementation in three sequential curricular units. In S. Lynch (Chair) & C. L. O'Donnell (Ed.), Fidelity of implementation in implementation and scale-up research designs: Applications from four studies of innovative science curriculum materials and diverse populations. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
24. Woodcock, R.W., McGrew, K.S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock- Johnson III: Tests of achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
25. Ysseldyke, J.R., Spicuzza, S., Kosciolek, S., & Boys, C. (2003). Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievement and classroom structure. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 163-173.