Testing the Relation Between Fidelity of Implementation and Student Outcomes in Math

Abstract

The relation between fidelity of implementation and student outcomes in a computer-based middle school mathematics curriculum was measured empirically. Participants included 485 students and 23 teachers from 11 public middle schools across seven states. Implementation fidelity was defined using two constructs: fidelity to structure and fidelity to process. Because of the nested nature of the data, we used a two-level hierarchical linear model for analysis. Four variables, all categorized as fidelity to structure variables, proved significant-total time in intervention (p <.001), concentration of time in intervention (p = .03), direct observation of intervention fidelity (p = .04), and pretest score (p <.001). Fidelity to process was found to be nonsignificant. The importance of measuring the relation between implementation fidelity and student outcomes is discussed as well as implications for researchers and teachers.

Examining the Relationship between Fidelity of Implementation of Accommodations for Students with Specific Learning Disabilities in Mathematics and Student Achievement in High School Algebra I Inclusion Classes

“…Zvoch studied program implementation in 99 kindergarten classrooms in 42 schools and although the focus of the study was on teacher-led implementation of the program, the researcher also focused on whether the various aspects of the program were implemented or not implemented without focusing on student outcomes. Zvoch's findings did not fully agreed with those of Crawford et al (2012) that teacher motivation, preparation and experience, as well as time and classroom management accounted for differences in how providers implement interventions. Zvoch (2009) found that along with the background characteristics of teachers (e.g., training, experience and qualifications), contextual factors in the treatment environment (e.g., class size) were also relevant to the fidelity with which teachers implemented a program.…”

“…Well planned research methods can easily become distorted when moved into the reality of classroom implementation (Crawford et al 2012). Well established educational researchers acknowledge the challenge of creating and implementing sound research studies within school settings (Gersten et al, 2005).…”

“…Well established educational researchers acknowledge the challenge of creating and implementing sound research studies within school settings (Gersten et al, 2005). Although researchers are striving to meet standards for internal and external validity, they are not questioning the influence of different standards within the context of unique studies with diverse populations (Crawford et al, 2012). Fidelity of implementation, however, is one measure of internal validity that is a "multilevel, multivariate phenomenon affected by personal, programmatic and contextual factors" (Zvoch, 2009, p. 46).…”

“…Fidelity of implementation, however, is one measure of internal validity that is a "multilevel, multivariate phenomenon affected by personal, programmatic and contextual factors" (Zvoch, 2009, p. 46). A threat to internal validity is weak implementation fidelity, a factor that has the potential to provide alternate explanations for observed effects (Crawford et al, 2012).…”

“…Much of the research surrounding implementation fidelity in education settings also has involved teacher-led instruction (e.g., Crawford et al, 2012, & Zvoch, 2009 teacher preparation and (c) teacher experience (Zvoch, 2009). From these constructs,…”