This book is compiled from the proceedings of the sixth summit entitled “Performance Feedback: Using Data to Improve Educator Performance.” The 2011 summit topic was selected to help answer the following question: What basic practice has the potential for the greatest impact on changing the behavior of students, teachers, and school administrative personnel?
States, J., Keyworth, R. & Detrich, R. (2013). Introduction: Proceedings from the Wing Institute’s Sixth Annual Summit on Evidence-Based Education: Performance Feedback: Using Data to Improve Educator Performance. In Education at the Crossroads: The State of Teacher Preparation (Vol. 3, pp. ix-xii). Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute.
One of the primary goals of implementation science is to insure that programs are implemented with integrity. This paper presents an integrated model of implementation that emphasizes treatment integrity.
Berkel, C., Mauricio, A. M., Schoenfelder, E., Sandler, I. N., & Collier-Meek, M. (2011). Putting the pieces together: An Integrated Model of program implementation. Prevention Science, 12, 23-33.
Dane and Schneider propose treatment integrity as a multi-dimensional construct and describe five dimensions that constitute the construct.
Dane, A. V., & Schneider, B. H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control. Clinical psychology review, 18(1), 23-45.
To produce better outcomes for students two things are necessary: (1) effective, scientifically supported interventions (2) those interventions implemented with high integrity. Typically, much greater attention has been given to identifying effective practices. This review focuses on features of high quality implementation.
Detrich, R. (2014). Treatment integrity: Fundamental to education reform. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 13(2), 258-271.
Reform efforts tend to come and go very quickly in education. This paper makes the argument that the sustainability of programs is closely related to how well those programs are implemented.
Detrich, R., Keyworth, R. & States, J. (2010). Treatment Integrity: A Fundamental Unit of Sustainable Educational Programs. Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 11(1), 4-29.
This Article introduces implicit bias-an aspect of the new science of unconscious mental processes that has substantial bearing on discrimination law.
Greenwald, A. G., & Krieger, L. H. (2006). Implicit bias: Scientific foundations. California Law Review, 94(4), 945-967.
This study evaluated the differences in estimates of treatment integrity be measuring different dimensions of it.
Hagermoser Sanetti, L. M., & Fallon, L. M. (2011). Treatment Integrity Assessment: How Estimates of Adherence, Quality, and Exposure Influence Interpretation of Implementation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 21(3), 209-232.
This paper suggests a model for selecting interventions that match the context of classrooms.
Harn, B., Parisi, D., & Stoolmiller, M. (2013). Balancing fidelity with flexibility and Fit: What do we really know about fidelity of implementation in schools?. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 181-193.
This paper reviews perspectives on treatment integrity from psychotherapy, substance abuse treatment, prevention science, and school psychology.
Schulte, A. C., Easton, J. E., & Parker, J. (2009). Advances in Treatment Integrity Research: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Conceptualization, Measurement, and Enhancement of Treatment Integrity. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 460-475.
The authors argue measuring treatment integrity will improve the quality of their decisions about the effectiveness of treatments. Measurement of different dimensions of treatment integrity allow researchers and practitioners to understand the relationships among them.
Yeaton, W. H., & Sechrest, L. (1981). Critical Dimensions in the Choice and Maintenance of Successful Treatments: Strength, Integrity, and Effectiveness. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 49(2), 156-167.