Search

The purpose of this study was to examine the technical features of slopes produced from the curriculum-based measurement in writing (CBM-W) word dictation task. Seventy-nine elementary students in the U.S. Midwest with intensive learning needs responded to weekly word dictation probes across 20 weeks; responses were scored for correct letter sequences (CLS). Scores showed evidence of high reliability and sensitivity to growth in a short period. Linear mixed modeling revealed that students gained an average of 0.91 CLS for each additional week of instruction. Initial writing levels and growth rates did not significantly differ depending on students' demographic characteristics. Based on these findings, we illustrate how word dictation slopes can be used as indicators of writing growth for students with intensive learning needs.

Teacher-level factors are theoretically linked to student outcomes in data-based instruction (DBI; Lembke et al., 2018). Professional development and ongoing support can increase teachers' knowledge, skills, and beliefs related to DBI, as well as their instructional fidelity (McMaster et al., 2020). However, less is known about how each of these teacher-level factors influences student progress during an intervention. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between several important teacher-level factors--teachers' writing instruction fidelity, knowledge and skills related to DBI, explicit writing orientation, and writing instruction self-efficacy--and students' writing growth. Participants were 49 U.S. elementary teachers and their 118 students struggling with early writing skills. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we found a significant positive relation between DBI knowledge and skills and student writing growth, but no relation was found between writing instruction fidelity, writing orientation, or self-efficacy and student writing growth. Implications for writing instruction fidelity measurement in DBI and professional development related to teachers' DBI knowledge and skills are discussed.

The purpose of this logistic regression study was to identify predictors of teacher-reported sustained use of data-based instruction (DBI) during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess the extent to which the identified predictors explained teachers' sustained use after completing programmatic support for intensive early writing instruction. We surveyed 58 teachers who participated in a professional development efficacy trial regarding their sustained use of DBI in writing. The model indicated a higher predicted probability of sustaining DBI for teachers who received the full treatment (tools, learning modules, and coaching for 20 weeks of intervention during their year of participation in the efficacy trial) compared to teachers in the control group who only received tools and learning modules at the end of their participation year. In addition, teachers who taught in-person were more likely to sustain compared to those who taught in remote or hybrid models, controlling for other variables. Furthermore, as the number of facilitators that teachers reported increased, teachers were more likely to sustain their use of DBI components, controlling for other variables. Further research could shed light on the relative impact of different types of facilitators and different levels of support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although data-based individualization (DBI) has positive effects on learning outcomes for students with learning difficulties, this framework can be difficult for teachers to implement due to its complexity and contextual barriers. The first aim of this synthesis was to investigate the effects of ongoing professional development (PD) support for DBI on teachers' DBI knowledge, skills, beliefs, and fidelity and the achievement of preschool to Grade 12 students with academic difficulties. The second aim was to report on characteristics of this support and explore whether features were associated with effects. We identified 26 studies, 16 and 22 of which examined teacher and student outcomes, respectively. Meta-analyses indicated that the weighted mean effect size for DBI with ongoing support for teachers was g = 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.43, 1.28], p <.001, I 2 = 83.74%, k = 46) and g = 0.31 for students (95% CI = [0.19, 0.42], p <.001, I 2 = 61.38%, k = 103). We did not identify moderators of treatment effects. However, subset effects were descriptively larger for ongoing support that targeted data-based instructional changes or included collaborative problem-solving. Researchers may improve future DBI PD by focusing on support for teachers' instructional changes, describing support practices in greater detail, and advancing technological supports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Nearly 50 years ago, Durkin (1978–1979) conducted a seminal observation study on reading comprehension teaching in Grades 3 through 6. She reported that teachers rarely taught reading comprehension (less than 1% of instructional time). Since then, we have gained substantial knowledge about teaching reading comprehension. We aimed to comprehensively review direct observation studies of reading instruction to understand the extent to which recommended comprehension practices are implemented in schools. Method: A systematic search of the extant literature identified 66 observation studies of reading comprehension instruction for children in K–12 schools, including a total of 1,784 teachers. We employed a mixed-method systematic review to address the research questions. Results: Integrated analyses revealed that reading comprehension instruction infrequently aligned with research-based practices. Findings revealed that, on average, 23% of instructional time during reading/language arts instruction was dedicated to reading comprehension. Like Durkin's study (1978–1979), the results indicated that teachers spent much of this time engaging in initiation-response-evaluation conversation patterns rather engaging students in extensive discussion of text or teaching knowledge or practices (e.g. text structure, reading comprehension strategies) that support reading comprehension. However, analyses suggested that studies conducted after 2000 reported more research-based reading comprehension practices than earlier studies. Conclusions: These findings suggest a substantial gap persists between the reading comprehension practices identified as research-based and those observed in typical practice. There is a need for renewed efforts to prioritize reading comprehension instruction in policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we describe the process of monitoring fidelity of implementation for a teacher-implemented early writing intervention. As part of a large, federally funded project, teachers who worked with students in grades 1 through 3 in schools across two states in the US were recruited and then randomly assigned to implementation and control conditions. Using Data-Based Individualization (DBI) as a framework for best practice in assessment and intervention, teachers in the implementation group received professional development on early writing intervention and assessment and then implemented these practices with their students who had significant writing challenges. Coaches, who were part of the research project, supported teachers and also observed teachers in both the implementation and control conditions at least twice during the course of the 20-week study. This paper focuses on the results of the fidelity measures that were administered throughout the project. An overview of the importance of fidelity checks is followed by a description of the fidelity tools used, as well as data from those tools. Areas of strength and challenge for teachers when implementing early writing assessment and intervention and engaging in data-based decision making with fidelity are discussed, along with recommendations regarding the practical and research importance of fidelity checks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For research-based academic interventions to continue to have positive effects on the outcomes of students with learning difficulties, teachers' initial implementation must be sustained after the removal of program support, including professional development (PD). In this mixed methods study, we investigated the extent to which teachers sustained data-based instruction (DBI) in early writing, 1–2 years after their participation in extensive PD, the Early Writing Project, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We applied a nested and interacting systems framework to examine how barriers and facilitators at macrosystem to student levels influenced teachers' self-reported ability or decision to sustain. Although most teachers sustained one or more core DBI components before and during the pandemic, few sustained data-based decision making. Our findings suggest that teachers' perceptions of their DBI sustainment was influenced by multiple interacting factors across system levels, such as student progress and limited time. Implications for approaches to supporting DBI, as well as implications for educational program sustainability theory, are discussed. Educational Impact and Implications Statement: In this mixed-methods study, we explored whether teachers continued using data-based instruction (DBI) for writing with their students with significant early writing difficulties 1–2 years after participating in professional development (PD), and why or why not. DBI is a process that teachers can use to design and evaluate individualized interventions for their students with significant learning difficulties. We found that many teachers were motivated to sustain one or more components of DBI because of student progress, even during the COVID-19 pandemic, but needed more support with data-based decision making. These findings can help identify ways to bridge DBI research and practice. Long-term implementation of DBI may require multiyear PD, integration with existing school data-based decision-making processes, and policy-level changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite decades of research efforts, data-based instruction (DBI) for students with intensive intervention needs are not being widely used in practice as anticipated, and many educators have difficulties in implementing it. This systematic review aimed to examine what kinds of implementation drivers and strategies have been used to support educators implementing DBI and what kinds of implementation outcomes researchers have measured. Eighteen studies were synthesized using the Implementation Drivers framework and Implementation Outcomes taxonomy and were quality appraised. We found that the majority of studies primarily used competency drivers to increase teachers' DBI expertise, while a limited number of studies focused on organizational and leadership drivers. Acceptability and fidelity were frequently assessed as implementation outcomes. We discussed the implications of the findings, including the need for researchers to incorporate implementation drivers and outcomes at diverse levels to best support educators' implementation of DBI, as well as the limitations of this review, such as the limited generalizability of the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a multiyear, multisite, randomized control trial, we examined the effects of comprehensive professional development designed to support teachers’ data-based instruction (DBI) for students with intensive early writing needs. Teachers (N = 154; primarily special educators or intervention specialists) were assigned randomly to a treatment group (n = 76), in which they received tools, learning, and coaching to support their DBI implementation over 20 weeks, or to a control group (n = 78). Students either received DBI in early writing (n = 155) from treatment teachers or their usual writing instruction (n = 154) from control teachers. Treatment teachers outperformed controls on measures of DBI knowledge and skills (d = 1.57) and self-efficacy for writing instruction (d = .94), and treatment students outperformed controls on proximal and distal writing outcomes (ds = .14–.29). Student characteristics (grade, special education status, English learner status, and race/ethnicity) did not moderate intervention effects. We discuss findings in terms of the importance of supporting students with intensive learning needs, the efficacy and feasibility of implementing DBI-TLC, and implications for pre- and in-service teacher training and support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For students with intensive learning needs for whom standard, validated interventions do not effectively promote academic growth, data-based instruction (DBI) is suggested as an effective, fine-grained approach to individualization. Key to DBI's success is making instructional changes based on individual students' progress monitoring data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of such instructional changes on student early writing outcomes. We applied a piecewise linear–linear mixed-effects (PLME) model to determine student writing growth trajectories before and after teachers introduced instructional changes. Using data from 46 elementary school students with intensive writing intervention needs, results showed that a PLME model with two segmented slopes—before and after the change—best explained students' observed change in writing scores. Results also showed that a higher level of initial writing skills was associated with higher levels of intercepts and additional growth gains after the instructional change, whereas the type of instructional change was not associated with predicted writing trajectories. We discuss the implications of positive effects of teachers' individualized timely decisions to change instruction using progress monitoring data as well as unexpected findings and study limitations such as small sample size and inconsistency in results. Educational Impact and Implications Statement: When individualizing instruction for students with the most intensive academic intervention needs, especially in writing, it is recommended that teachers use student progress data to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. Teachers are encouraged to change their instruction if the data indicates that students are not progressing as expected. We examined whether the instructional changes made by elementary special education teachers while implementing data-based instruction (DBI) improved the early writing outcomes of struggling beginning writers. When teachers made appropriate decisions to change instruction for those students who were experiencing slower-than-expected writing progress within DBI, the students showed facilitated writing growth following these instructional changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]