Fidelity Supports for Tier 2 Mathematics EBP Implementation in a Rural School

Abstract

This study examined how to support implementation agents in establishing and maintaining the implementation fidelity (IF) of a mathematics evidence-based practice (EBP) for Tier 2 instruction in a rural Midwestern U.S. school. Tier 2 interventions, which serve students at risk of academic failure, play a critical role in bridging general and special education. However, their effectiveness is often hindered by low IF—the degree to which interventions are delivered as intended. This mixed-methods sequential explanatory study employed a multiple-baseline single-subject design in Phase 1 to evaluate the effects of an IF intervention package on participants’ fidelity to a Tier 2 word problem-solving intervention. Semi-structured interviews in Phase 2 explored participants’ experiences with the intervention and examined contextual factors influencing EBP implementation in rural settings. The findings underscore the importance of understanding rural school contexts and providing structured supports to enhance the implementation of mathematics EBPs in these settings.

Keywords

implementation fidelity MTSS Tier 2 mixed-methods word problem-solving rural schools

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allensworth

Cashdollar

Cassata

(2022). Supporting change in instructional practices to meet the Common Core mathematics and next generation science standards: How are different supports related to instructional change? AERA Open, 8(1), 23328584221088010. https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221088010

Anser

M. K.

Yousaf

Nassani

A. A.

Alotaibi

S. M.

Kabbani

Zaman

(2020). Dynamic linkages between poverty, inequality, crime, and social expenditures in a panel of 16 countries: Two-step GMM estimates. Journal of Economic Structures, 9(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-020-00220-6

Archer

A. L.

Hughes

C. A.

(2010). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. Guilford Press.

Atas

Ozsandikci

Olcay

Saral

(2023). Opinions about evidence-based practices among special education teachers. Journal of Evidence-based Social Work, 20(1), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2022.2133981

Berkeley

Scanlon

Bailey

T. R.

Sutton

J. C.

Sacco

D. M.

(2020). A snapshot of RTI implementation a decade later: New picture, same story. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(5), 332–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420915867

Blair

(2016). A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 6(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.2458/azu_jmmss.v6i1.18772

Bos

S. E.

Powell

S. R.

Maddox

S. A.

Doabler

C. T.

(2023). A synthesis of the conceptualization and measurement of implementation fidelity in mathematics intervention research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 56(2), 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211065498

Brock

M. E.

Carter

E. W.

(2013). A systematic review of paraprofessional-delivered educational practices to improve outcomes for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(4), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/154079691303800401

Campbell

Anderson

C. M.

(2011). Check-in/check-out: A systematic evaluation and component analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(2), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-315

10.

Caniglia

Meadows

(2018). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ use of web resources. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 25(3), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1564/tme_v25.3.02

11.

Center on MTSS. (2019). Is MTSS the new RTI? Depends on where you live. https://mtss4success.org/blog/mtss-new-rti-depends-where-you-live

12.

Center on Multi-Tiered Systems of Support. (2025). Multi-level prevention system. https://mtss4success.org/essential-components/multi-level-prevention-system

13.

Chaparro

E. A.

Kittelman

McDaniel

S. C.

Peshak George

VanLone

(2022). Examining rural school implementation of positive behavioral supports across tiers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 41(3), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/87568705221097114

14.

Cohen

Wong

V. C.

Krishnamachari

Erickson

(2024). Experimental evidence on the robustness of coaching supports in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 53(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X231198827

15.

Cook

Odom

(2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900201

16.

Creswell

J. W.

(2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage.

17.

Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 U.S.C. § 7801(33). (2015). https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1177

18.

Ferrell

V. A.

Tharpe

A. S.

(2024). Enhancing rural science education through school district–University partnership. Education Sciences, 14(7), 712. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070712

19.

Flores

M. A.

Day

(2006). Contexts which shape and reshape new teachers’ identities: A multi-perspective study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.09.002

20.

Garbacz

S. A.

Santiago

R. T.

Gulbrandson

(2022). Examining implementation of positive behavioral interventions and supports in rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 41(2), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/87568705221097117

21.

Garman-McClaine

(2024). A comparison of general and special education teachers’ attitudes toward evidence-based practices for students with autism spectrum disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 61(7), 2880–2892. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23195

22.

Geary

D. C.

(2011). Consequences, characteristics, and causes of mathematical learning disabilities and persistent low achievement in mathematics. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 32(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1097/dbp.0b013e318209edef

23.

Hartman

S. L.

Johnson

Showalter

Eppley

Klein

(2023). Why rural matters 2023: Centering equity and opportunity: A discussion with the research team. The Rural Educator, 44(4), 69–71. https://doi.org/10.55533/2643-9662.1441

24.

Hawkins-Lear

Grisham-Brown

(2019). Teaching early math skills to young children with disabilities in rural blended early childhood settings. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 38(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518792907

25.

Hoffman

J. V.

Wetzel

M. M.

Maloch

Greeter

Taylor

DeJulio

Vlach

S. K.

(2015). What can we learn from studying the coaching interactions between cooperating teachers and preservice teachers? A literature review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 52, 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.09.004

26.

Hudson

R. F.

Davis

C. A.

Blum

Greenway

Hackett

Kidwell

Liberty

McCollow

Patish

Pierce

Schulze

Smith

M. M.

Peck

C. A.

(2016). A socio-cultural analysis of practitioner perspectives on implementation of evidence-based practice in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 50(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466915613592

27.

Hugh

M. L.

Pullmann

M. D.

Joshi

Tagavi

D. M.

Ahlers

Hernandez

A. M.

Locke

(2023). Educators’ perspectives on training mechanisms that facilitate evidence-based practice use for autistic students in general education settings: A mixed-methods analysis. Teacher Education and Special Education, 46(4), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064231178768

28.

Indiana Department of Education. (2017). Indiana’s learning evaluation and assessment readiness network. https://www.in.gov/doe/students/assessment/ilearn/

29.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

30.

Johnson

L. D.

Wehby

J. H.

Symons

F. J.

Moore

T. C.

Maggin

D. M.

Sutherland

K. S.

(2014). An analysis of preference relative to teacher implementation of intervention. The Journal of Special Education, 48(3), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913475872

31.

Kretlow

A. G.

Bartholomew

C. C.

(2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4), 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406410371643

32.

Ledford

J. R.

Lambert

J. M.

Pustejovsky

J. E.

Zimmerman

K. N.

Hollins

Barton

E. E.

(2023). Single-case-design research in special education: Next-generation guidelines and considerations. Exceptional Children, 89(4), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029221137656

33.

Mason

E. N.

Benz

S. A.

Lembke

E. S.

Burns

M. K.

Powell

S. R.

(2019). From professional development to implementation: A district’s experience implementing mathematics tiered systems of support. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(4), 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12206

34.

McIntosh

Goodman

(2016). Multi-tiered systems of support: Integrating academic RTI and school-wide PBIS. Guilford Press.

35.

Merle

J. L.

Larson

M. F.

Cook

C. R.

Brewer

S. K.

Hamlin

Duong

McGinnis

J. L.

Thayer

A. J.

Gaias

L. M.

Lyon

A. R.

(2022). A mixed-method study examining solutions to common barriers to teachers’ adoption of evidence-based classroom practices. Psychology in the Schools, 59(9), 1825–1843. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22732

36.

NAEP. (2022). Largest score declines in NAEP mathematics at grades 4 and 8 since initial assessments in 1990. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/mathematics/2022/

37.

NAEP. (2025). NAEP report card: Mathematics performance by student group. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/reports/mathematics/2024/g4_8/performance-by-student-group/?grade=4#national-group-score-distributions

38.

Nelson

P. M.

Pulles

S. M.

Parker

D. C.

Klaft

(2020). Implementation fidelity for math intervention: Basic quality ratings to supplement adherence. School Psychology, 35(1), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000338

39.

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(1), 33–84. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313793

40.

Otter.ai Inc. (2025). Otter.ai. https://otter.ai/

41.

Owoseni

Ibem

Opoko

(2020). Impact of physical learning environment on students’ learning outcomes in secondary schools in Lagos State Nigeria. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3635–3642. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080841

42.

Parker

R. I.

Vannest

(2009). An improved effect size for single-case research: Nonoverlap of all pairs. Behavior Therapy, 40(4), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2008.10.006

43.

Phrampus

P. E.

O’Donnell

J. M.

(2013). Debriefing using a structured and supported approach. In Levine

A. I.

DeMaria

Schwartz

A. D.

Sim

A. J.

(Eds.), The comprehensive textbook of healthcare simulation (pp. 73–84). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5993-4_6

44.

Pierce

C. D.

Mueller

T. G.

(2018). Easy as A-B-C: Data-based guidelines for implementing a multitiered system of supports into rural schools. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(3), 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518777850

45.

Powell

D. R.

Diamond

K. E.

(2013). Implementation fidelity of a coaching-based professional development program for improving Head Start teachers’ literacy and language instruction. Journal of Early Intervention, 35(2), 102–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815113516678

46.

Proctor

Silmere

Raghavan

Hovmand

Aarons

Bunger

Griffey

Hensley

(2011). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7

47.

Salvador

J. G.

Altschul

Rosas

S. R.

Goldman

A. W.

Feldstein Ewing

S. W.

(2018). Use of concept mapping to support evidence-based practice implementation improvement in rural areas. Journal of Rural Mental Health, 42(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/rmh0000086

48.

Sanetti

L. M. H.

Cook

B. G.

Cook

(2021). Treatment fidelity: What it is and why it matters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 36(1), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12238

49.

Scheeler

M. C.

Ruhl

K. L.

McAfee

J. K.

(2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(4), 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/088840640402700407

50.

Scott

T. M.

Gage

N. A.

Hirn

R. G.

Lingo

A. S.

Burt

(2019). An examination of the association between MTSS implementation fidelity measures and student outcomes. Preventing School Failure, 63(4), 9–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2019.1605971

51.

Scruggs

T. E.

Mastropieri

M. A.

Casto

(1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258700800206

52.

Showalter

Hartman

S. L.

Eppley

Johnson

Klein

(2025). Why rural matters 2025: People, place, and possibility. https://nrea.net/wrm-2025/full-report/

53.

Spooner

Root

J. R.

Saunders

A. F.

Browder

D. M.

(2019). An updated evidence-based practice review on teaching mathematics to students with moderate and severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 40, 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517751055

54.

Stahl

Sharplin

Kehrwald

(2016). Developing pre-service teachers’ confidence: Real-time coaching in teacher education. Reflective Practice, 17(6), 724–738. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2016.1206882

55.

Steinbach

Stoeger

(2016). How primary school teachers’ attitudes towards self-regulated learning (SRL) influence instructional behavior and training implementation in classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 60(60), 256–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.017

56.

The IRIS Center. (2006). RTI (part 3): Reading instruction. https://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03-reading/

57.

Toman

Maag

J. W.

(2024). A survey of rural special education teachers’ professional development experiences. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 43(3), 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/87568705241258737

58.

Weaver

Capobianco

Ruffolo

(2015). Systematic review of EBPs for SMI in rural America. Journal of Evidence-informed Social Work, 12(2), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/15433714.2013.765815

59.

Wolf

M. M.

(1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-203

60.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2022). What Works Clearinghouse procedures and standards handbook, version 5.0. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks

61.

Xin

Y. P.

(2012). Conceptual model-based problem solving: Teach students with learning difficulties to solve math problems (1st 20 ed.). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-104-7

62.

Xin

Y. P.

Wiles

Lin

Y. Y.

(2008). Teaching conceptual model—Based word problem story grammar to enhance mathematics problem solving. Journal of Special Education, 42(3), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466907312895

63.

Zagona

A. L.

Kurth

J. A.

MacFarland

S. Z. C.

(2017). Teachers’ views of their preparation for inclusive education and collaboration. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(3), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417692969

64.

Zhang

Martella

R. C.

Kang

Yilmaz Yenioglu

(2023). Response to Intervention (RTI)/Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS): A nationwide analysis. Journal of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, 7(2), 1–26.

65.

Zhang

Mims

P. J.

Rowe

D. A.

Brown

Perkins

(under review). Fidelity in mathematics intervention implementation research: Lessons from implementation science and the current practices. Manuscript Under Review for Publication.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.02 MB

0.00 MB