Teachers are responsible for using evidence-based practices to improve students’ academic and behavioral outcomes. Although teachers have access to a variety of resources on evidence-based practices, poor implementation can adversely affect their effectiveness. However, an inadequate student response to intervention may also be the result of a mismatch between the practice and the student’s needs. As a result, it is important for teachers to determine the degree to which they implement evidence-based practices as intended to determine if an inadequate student response is due to poor implementation or inappropriate selection of intervention. The authors discuss the importance of fidelity of implementation. Methods teachers can use to measure implementation fidelity are reported. Suggested methods are discussed and examples are provided.
BabyakA. E.LuzeG. J.KampsD. M. (2000). The Good Student Game: Behavior management for diverse classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, 35(4), 216–224.
2.
BarrishH.SaundersM.WolfM. (1969). Good Behavior Game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2(2), 119–124.
3.
CrawfordL.CarpenterD.WilsonM.SchmeisterM.McDonaldM. (2012). Testing the relation between fidelity of implementation and student outcomes in math. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(4), 224–235.
4.
DurlakJ.DuPreE. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3), 327–350.
5.
EmbryD. (2002). The Good Behavior Game: A best practice candidate as a universal behavioral vaccine. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5(4), 273–297.
6.
FoormanB.MoatsL. (2004). Conditions for sustaining research-based practices in early reading instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 25(1), 51–60.
7.
FurtakEl.Ruiz-PrimoM.ShemwellJ.AyalaC.BrandonP.ShavelsonR.YinY. (2008). On the fidelity of implementing embedded formative assessment and its relation to student learning. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(4), 360–389.
8.
GerstenR.FuchsL.ComptonD.CoyneM.GreenwoodC.InnocentiM. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 149–164.
9.
GreshamF. (2009). Evolution of the treatment integrity concept: Current status and future directions. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 533–540.
10.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of2004, 20 U.S.C. § 614 et seq.
11.
JobeJ. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research, 12, 219–227.
12.
JohnsonE.MellardD.FuchsD.McKnightM. (2006). Responsiveness to intervention (RTI): How to do it. Lawrence, KS: National Research Center on Learning Disabilities.
13.
Keller-MargulisM. (2012). Fidelity of implementation framework: A critical need for response to intervention models. Psychology in the Schools, 49(4), 342–352.
14.
KovaleskiJ.GicklingE.MarrowH. (1999). High versus low implementation of instructional support teams: A case for maintaining program fidelity. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 170–183.
15.
LevinH.CatlinD.ElsonA. (2005, August31). Costs of implementing adolescent literacy. New York: Carnegie Corporation.
16.
McGoeyK. E.SchneiderD. L.RezzetanoK. M.ProdanT.TankersleyM. (2010). Classwide intervention to manage disruptive behavior in the kindergarten classroom. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 26, 247–261. doi:10.1080/15377903.2010.495916
17.
McKennaS.RosenfieldS.GravoisT. (2009). Measuring the behavioral indicators of instructional consultation: A preliminary validity study. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 496–509.
18.
MowbrayC.HolterM.TeagueG.BybeeD. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(3), 315–340.
19.
NoellG.GreshamF.GansleK. (2002). Does treatment integrity matter? A preliminary investigation of instructional implementation and mathematics performance. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 51–67.
20.
NoellG.WittJ.SliderN.ConnellJ.GattiS.WilliamsK.. . . ResetarJ. (2005). Treatment implementation following behavioral consultation in schools: A comparison of three follow-up strategies. School Psychology Review, 34(1), 87–106.
21.
O’DonnellC. (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.
22.
PowerT.Blom-HofmanJ.ClarkeA.Riley-TillmanT.KelleherC.ManzP. (2005). Reconceptualizing intervention integrity: A partnership-based framework for linking research with practice. Psychology in the Schools, 42(5), 495–507.
Ruiz-PrimoM. (2005, April). A multi-method and multi-source approach for studying fidelity of implementation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
25.
SanettiL.KratochwillT. (2009). Toward developing a science of treatment integrity: Introduction to the special series. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 445–459.
26.
SchulteA.EastonJ.ParkerJ. (2009). Advances in treatment integrity research: Multidisciplinary perspectives on the conceptualization, measurement, and enhancement of treatment integrity. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 460–475.
27.
SheridanS.Swanger-GagneM.WelchG.KwonK.GarbaczS. (2009). Fidelity measurement in consultation: Psychometric issues and preliminary examination. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 476–495.
28.
SongerN.GotwalsA. (2005, April). Fidelity of implementation in three sequential curricular units. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
29.
SteinM. L.BerendsM.FuchsD.McMasterK.SaenzL.YenL.ComptonD. L. (2008). Scaling up an early reading program: Relationships among teacher support, fidelity of implementation, and student performance across different sites and years. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30, 368–388. doi: 10.3102/0162373708322738
30.
SwansonE.WanzekJ.HaringC.CiulloS.McCulleyL. (2013). Intervention fidelity in special and general education research journals. Journal of Special Education, 47(1), 3–13.
31.
TingstromD.Sterling-TurnerH.WilczynskiS. (2006). The Good Behavior Game: 1969- 2002. Behavior Modification, 30(2), 225–253.
32.
VaughnS.KlingnerJ. K.SwansonE. A.BoardmanA. G.RobertsG.MohammedS. S.Stillman-SpisakS. J. (2011). Efficacy of collaborative strategic reading with middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 48(4), 938–964.
33.
YsseldykeJ.BoltD. (2007). Effect of technology-enhanced continuous progress monitoring on math achievement. School Psychology Review, 36(3), 453–467.
