The purpose of this study is to examine the extent to which two specific elements of fidelity of implementation (i.e., adherence and quality of delivery) enhanced or constrained the effects of a reading intervention for middle school students experiencing reading difficulties. A total of 281 middle school students with reading difficulties received an intensive reading intervention (i.e., Corrective Reading Decoding strand) delivered by trained school staff (n = 21) at three middle schools. Although students receiving the Corrective Reading Decoding strand made statistically significant (p < .001) improvements in their basic reading skills and passage comprehension overall, variations in student gains were found. Overall fidelity of implementation accounted for 22% and 18% of the variance in the gains in basic reading skills and passage comprehension of middle school students with reading difficulties, respectively (p < .05). Two teacher actions, following the lesson format as designed and reteaching lessons when needed, predicted student basic reading and passage comprehension skills above and beyond other teacher actions (p < .05). Results, implications, and limitations are discussed.
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.
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.
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: Reading2007 (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.
