Search

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]

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]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]