Project PRIME: Planning Realistic Intervention Implementation and Maintenance for Educators

• Description:
  

  The intent of this study is to develop a theoretically and empirically based system of supports that will prevent teachers’ level of treatment integrity from declining.

• Research Question:
  1. Can functional relationships be demonstrated between PRIME components and initial and maintained treatment integrity? 2. Does self-administered or assisted action and coping planning result in high levels of initial and maintained treatment integrity? 3. How does implementation of PRIME affect student behavior outcomes? 4. What approximate “dose” of intervention (i.e., number, duration, frequency of intervention sessions) is required to achieve a visible change in level and stability of data measuring behavioral intentions and treatment integrity?
• Design:
  A series of single-case-design intervention studies. Participants include teachers and students in Connecticut schools.

• Project Liason:
  Lisa M. H. Sanetti, Ph.D.
• Co-Project Liason:
  Thomas Kratochwill, Ph.D.
• Sponsor:
  Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education
• Website:
  www.primeimplementation.com

Review of Treatment Integrity Data in the School Psychology Literature: 1995-2007

• Description:
  

  This study aims to provide intervention services to students is a primary responsibility of school psychologists. The increased demands for high levels of accountability within the field of education (e.g., No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, Individuals with Disabilities Act of 2004) have resulted in an increased focus on evidence-based practice (EBP). A primary tenant of EBP is that educators, including school psychologists, implement interventions that have strong empirical support. Researchers use a variety of rigorous experimental designs to demonstrate the effect of an intervention (i.e., independent variable) on student outcomes (i.e., dependent variable). To draw valid conclusions regarding such an effect, it is essential to assess both the outcomes of an intervention and treatment integrity, or the extent to which the intervention was implemented. Reviews of the treatment outcome literature across multiple areas (e.g., behavior analysis, learning disabilities, prevention programming) suggest that researchers often fail to report treatment integrity data. To date, the school psychology literature has not been reviewed. This will be done in this study.

• Research Question:
  What can be derived from coding the treatment integrity data reported in all school- and home-based experimental intervention articles, conducted with individuals up to 18 years, published in six prominent school psychology journals (i.e., School Psychology Review, School Psychology Quarterly, Psychology in the Schools, Journal of School Psychology, School Psychology International) between 1995 and 2007?
• Design:
  Literature Review

• Project Liason:
  Lisa M. H. Sanetti, Ph.D.
• Sponsor:
  University of Connecticut Faculty Small Grant Competition

Accuracy of teacher self-report as a treatment integrity assessment for behavioral interventions: A comparison of daily and weekly self-recording and self-reporting

• Description:
  

  This study acknowledges there is growing evidence in the professional literature that (a) few researchers assess treatment integrity, (b) few practitioners assess treatment integrity, and (c) many teachers implement classroom-based interventions with a low level of integrity. Teacher self-report has been proposed as a viable alternative to more time intensive assessment methods (e.g., direct observation) and limited available data suggest that teachers are more accurate when they report treatment integrity daily as opposed to weekly. This informs the study's research question and design.

• Research Question:
  This study encompasses several questions: (1) Will teacher daily verbal self-report be more accurate than weekly verbal self-report for assessing the treatment integrity with which elementary school teachers implement a daily report card intervention? (2) Will teacher daily self-recording be more accurate than weekly self-recording for assessing the treatment integrity with which elementary school teachers implement a daily report card intervention? (3) Will teacher daily self-recording be more accurate than daily verbal self-report for assessing the treatment integrity with which elementary school teachers implement a daily report card intervention? (4) Will teacher weekly self-recording be more accurate than weekly verbal self-report for assessing the treatment integrity with which elementary school teachers implement a daily report card intervention?
• Design:
  A self-monitoring intervention is developed for students who demonstrate challenging behaviors. Approximately 30 teachers from local elementary schools will participate in either the self-recording or self-reporting condition on a daily or weekly basis to measure treatment integrity of the intervention implemented.

• Project Liason:
  Lisa M. H. Sanetti, Ph.D.
• Sponsor:
  University of Connecticut Faculty Large Grant Competition