Fidelity of Implementation: Three Dimensions

| RTI Practices | Caveats and Concerns | Three Dimensions | Resources |

Dimension One: Method

Checking the implementation of a process for fidelity can be an extremely complex and resource-intensive process. In the research literature, checks for fidelity typically involve frequent observations and recording of behavior, teacher questionnaires, and self-report or videotaping of lessons. The tools available to achieve fidelity can be divided into two main categories (Gresham, 1989):

  1. Direct assessment. The components of an intervention are clearly specified in operational terms within a checklist based on the task analysis of the major intervention components. A qualified staff member observes the intervention and counts the occurrence of each component to determine the percentage correctly implemented and identifies those teachers needing retraining.
  2. Indirect assessment. Included in this type of assessment are self-reports, rating scales, interviews, and permanent products. Of the indirect methods, permanent product assessment is thought to be the most reliable and accurate. Permanent products might include samples of student work or student performance on assessments and videotapes of instructional sessions.

Written instructional materials or manuals represent a necessary but not all-sufficient method of ensuring the fidelity of implementation of interventions. The use of such written materials or manuals should be corroborated by direct and indirect measures. In other words, in reviewing a checklist, a teacher might use student work samples as evidence of compliance with the outlined steps on the checklist (Reschly & Gresham, 2006).

Although direct assessments of an intervention are considered to be best practice, schools likely will have to prioritize the ways in which they plan to ensure fidelity of implementation of the various components of RTI. Many of the tools to begin a process of fidelity checks may already exist within a school or are "built in" within the RTI process.


Dimension Two: Frequency

The frequency with which teachers are observed to ensure fidelity of implementation will vary depending upon several factors. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • Teacher experience level
  • Teacher requests for support
  • Overall class performance
  • Degree to which special education referrals do or do not decrease

In the interest of maintaining a non-punitive viewpoint of the evaluation process, it is important that a school set up a timeline for conducting teacher evaluations at the beginning of the school year. This allows teachers to see (a) that fidelity of implementation is important to the principal, school, and district and (b) that regular observations of teachers' implementation is a typical course of action. The person who is designated as the observer (e.g., the principal or reading specialist) would ensure that all teachers are on the schedule for at least one observation.

It is important that new staff be evaluated during the first month of the school year and then further observations can be set up throughout the year depending on need. The dates for the screenings can be included on this timeline so that teachers are aware of when the student progress data will be collected. Throughout the year, it is also important for teachers to be able to submit comments regarding the evaluation process or the curriculum as well as requests for support in the implementation process.

Dimension Three: Support Systems

As applied by schools, fidelity of implementation serves the purpose of identifying areas of deficiency that need to be remedied. For example, a newly hired teacher may not be familiar with the school's reading curriculum. This teacher might require professional development opportunities to become acquainted with the principles and procedures of the curriculum. Or, a particular classroom may not have sufficient resources to implement and sustain a system of progress monitoring. This deficiency would require the subsequent attainment or redistribution of resources within the school. The kinds of support systems that are required to correct areas of deficiency likely will fall into one of two categories:

  1. Professional development. This may include formal opportunities for workshops and in-service professional development as well as partnership with mentor teachers or coaches.
  2. Resource allocation. If teachers do not have the proper resources to implement the intervention, it is incumbent upon the school leadership to obtain or redistribute resources.

Putting the Three-Dimensional Model Together

RTI represents a significant instructional shift for many schools that requires a coordination of processes at the school and teacher level. Fidelity of implementation is critical if RTI or any education intervention is to be successful. We recognize that schools have limited resources with which to implement the many initiatives and policy requirements they face. The table below portrays a sample application of the process of fidelity of implementation, noting indicators and applying the three-dimensional model described on these pages.


References

Gresham, F.M. (1989). Assessment of treatment integrity in school consultation and prereferral intervention. School Psychology Review, 18(1), 37-50.

Reschly, D.J., & Gresham, F.M. (2006, April). Implementation fidelity of SLD identification procedures. Presentation at the National SEA Conference on SLD Determination: Integrating RTI within the SLD Determination Process, Kansas City, MO (pdf)