ons, which resulted in an overall weighted effect size (ES) = 0.43 (95% CI = [0.25, 0.62], p < .001). Using reading passages that represented an instructional level based on accuracy criteria led to a large weighted effect of ES = 1.03, 95% CI = [0.65, 1.40], p < .01), which was reliably larger (p < .05) than that for reading fluency interventions that used reading passages with an instructional level based on rate criteria (weighted ES = 0.29, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.50], p < .01). Using reading passages based on leveling systems or those written at the students’ current grade level resulted in small weighted effects. The approach to determining difficulty for reading passages used in reading fluency interventions accounted for 11% of the variance in the effect (p < .05) beyond student group (no risk, at-risk, disability) and type of fluency intervention. The largest weighted effect was found for students with reading disabilities (ES = 1.14, 95% CI = [0.64, 1.65], p < .01).

27:T4f1,

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Self-Assessment Survey (SAS) 4.0, an updated measure assessing implementation fidelity of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS). A total of 627 school personnel from 33 schools in six U.S. states completed the SAS 4.0 during the 2021–2022 school year. We evaluated data demonstrating the measure’s reliability (internal consistency, interrater reliability between PBIS team and non-team members), internal structure, and convergent validity for assessing implementation of Tier 1, 2, and 3 systems. We found strong internal consistency (overall and across subscales) and evidence regarding the internal structure as a four-factor measure. In addition, we found the SAS 4.0 (overall score and subscales) to be statistically significantly correlated with another widely used and empirically evaluated PBIS fidelity measure, the Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI). We found a statistically significant correlation between the SAS 4.0 and the SAS 3.0 for the Schoolwide Systems subscale but not other subscales. We discuss limitations given the current sample and describe implications for how PBIS teams can use the measure for school improvement and decision making.

28:T62a,