Welcome to the Reading Research Recap!

I am Dr. Neena Saha, Research Advisor at MetaMetrics. My focus is bridging the research-practice gap so that you can access useful resources that support reading success, expand awareness of the latest reading research, and inform your teaching and learning strategies. This monthly compendium offers the most relevant and must-read research impacting the reading and learning landscape, including easy-to-view, digestible highlights. We want the data and findings to be as useful to you as possible, so please do connect with me with any ideas and comments for next month. Enjoy the latest Reading Research Recap!

Deep Dive: Evidence-Based Interventions and Structured Adaptations

Hi everyone! 

There’s a lot of discussion in structured literacy circles about fidelity, or the degree to which an intervention or program is implemented in the way it was designed. But many interventions are created under idealized conditions which often do not reflect the variation found in classrooms. 

So, how can teachers implement evidence-aligned interventions while still addressing their unique student needs? It is a great question that is answered in the paper I chose for this month: Asset-Based Implementation of Structured Adaptations in an Online Third-Grade Content Literacy Intervention

The TL;DR: allowing teachers to participate in team-based learning activities and use their professional judgement to make structured adaptations led to increased student engagement, better student outcomes, and higher fidelity 

Rationale

The researchers wanted to know how structured adaptations would influence student engagement and learning outcomes as well as implementation fidelity in teachers.

Methods

Schools were randomly assigned to either Core Treatment or Adaptive Treatment. 

Sample

  • The sample consisted of 95 third-grade teachers and 1,914 students across 26 elementary schools in an urban southeastern district. 

Intervention

  • Both conditions implemented the MORE intervention, which is a content literacy intervention. You can learn more about MORE in a previous reading research recap here or from their website here
  • Only the teachers in the adaptive Treatment Condition participated in Team-­ Based Learning (TBL) sessions and were allowed to customize aspects like strategies used and pacing to meet student needs.

Results

The Adaptive Treatment condition outperformed the Core Treatment condition on certain student engagement measures, teacher implementation measures, and student learning outcome measures, including science background knowledge, and science content reading comprehension (near-transfer passages). 

There were several other measures where there was no significant difference between the two conditions, but it is important to remember that the comparison group was the MORE intervention without structured adaptations, not a “business as usual” condition. So, this can be interpreted that allowing teachers to implement structured adaptations was not harmful, and oftentimes better for many outcome measures. 

Practical implications

Structured Adaptations are beneficial! Here’s a great quote from the conclusion of the paper:

“There is emerging evidence that structured adaptations can enhance program effectiveness (e.g., Kim et al. 2017; Lemons et al. 2014; Neuman et al. 2021), particularly amidst diverse challenges. When supported by researchers and aligned with core principles, these adaptations maintain fidelity while increasing student engagement and learning outcomes by addressing unique student and local context needs. For policymakers and educational leaders, our findings advocate for policies that support adaptive frameworks.” 

Additional Research of Interest

Professional development, commentary, policy, etc.

Foundational skills

Dyslexia, Learning Disabilities, Struggling Readers, Etc.

Fluency

Reading comprehension

Let's Connect

Complete our form and we'll be in touch soon.