Method

Procedures

Test-administration training. Research staff were taught to administer the pretreatment, posttreatment, and monitoring measures in several training sessions. Interrater agreement sessions followed, during which the staff observed simulated testing sessions and scored protocols. Interrater agreement was calculated using a point-by-point method comparing each staff member's scored protocols with protocols scored by an experienced tester. Staff members who failed to reach 90% agreement on one or more of the measures received additional training and practice until they achieved criterion.

Pre- and posttreatment testing. In October, staff members obtained signed parental consent forms from students participating in PALS. These students were tested individually in a quiet location (such as a library or conference room). Tests were administered in two sessions. During the first session, the examiner spent several minutes establishing rapport with the student. The Rapid Letter Naming test was always administered first; the Rapid Letter Sound, segmentation, and WRMT-R subtests were then given in random order. During the second session, the blending test was administered, followed by the spelling test. For a given student, the staff member who administered measures in session one also worked with the child in session two. In April, research staff again tested students in two sessions. To avoid examiner bias, staff did not test students whom they had tutored. Again, the examiner spent several minutes establishing rapport with the student. The near-transfer passages were added to the end of the first session, and the CRAB was added to the end of the second session. Again, testers worked with the same child across the two sessions.

Monitoring progress. For the first seven weeks of PALS, research staff administered the monitoring measures individually to the at-risk and average-performing students. After the nonresponders were identified and assigned randomly to treatment conditions, the CBM measures were administered biweekly for the remaining 13 weeks of treatment.

Training, technical assistance, and implementation. In October, all teachers from the Standard PALS and PALS + Fluency classrooms attended a full-day workshop in which the PALS procedures were described, demonstrated, and practiced. Teachers then returned to their classrooms and trained their students to conduct PALS. A staff member visited each classroom twice weekly. All participants implemented PALS for 7 weeks (from October to December).

In January, the research staff attended a full-day workshop to learn the Modified PALS and Tutoring procedures. Each staff member was assigned tutoring and/or classroom support roles. Those designated to support PALS classrooms were responsible for training nonresponders and their Coaches to conduct Modified PALS, and for providing weekly technical assistance. Tutors were responsible for working one-to-one with their assigned students three times per week, 35 minutes per session. The PALS, Modified PALS, and Tutoring treatments were implemented for an additional 13 weeks (from January to April).

Treatment fidelity. For PALS, Modified PALS, and Tutoring, a checklist of teacher and student behaviors was developed to assess fidelity of implementation. In December, and again in March, fidelity checks of the 22 PALS classrooms were conducted. On average, PALS was implemented with 92% fidelity. In April, the first author conducted a fidelity check of Modified PALS. Each of 15 pairs participating in Modified PALS was observed. On average, it was implemented with 86% fidelity, with a range of 49% to 100%.

Because of scheduling problems, it was not practical to do on-site observations of the Tutoring activities. Instead, each tutor participated in a simulated tutoring session. The tutor conducted the activities with another staff member serving as the tutee. Across the 8 tutors, the simulations were implemented with 97% fidelity, as scored by the first author. In addition, one session conducted with each nonresponder was audiotaped and reviewed by a staff member. These sessions were conducted, on average, with 96% fidelity. (For more detailed information on the fidelity of implementation of PALS, Modified PALS, and Tutoring, contact the first author.)

Previous Page | Next Page
(Method: Measures) | (Results)