Balancing Fidelity With Flexibility and Fit: What Do We Really Know About Fidelity of Implementation in Schools?
Balancing Fidelity With Flexibility and Fit: What Do We Really Know About Fidelity of Implementation in Schools?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/001440291307900204
复制
发表时间：
2013-12-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Stoolmiller, Mike
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harn, Beth;Parisi, Danielle;Stoolmiller, Mike
治疗的忠实性，或按照设计应用干预措施，是成功实施循证实践的关键问题。通常情况下，假设以高保真度实施的循证实践将导致改善的结果，而高保真度将导致较差的结果。这些假设假定研究人员和从业人员对什么是忠诚度，如何衡量它，以及什么程度的忠诚度优化结果达成一致;然而，在这些问题上没有广泛的共识。本文讨论了治疗保真度的维度和细微差别，以及测量和分析它与学生成绩的关系。作者回顾了研究表明，不同学校，项目类型和对学生成绩的影响，特殊教育工作者在设计干预研究和实施循证实践时应该考虑的忠诚度的差异关系。特殊教育工作者应该优先考虑具有明确识别的组件的实践和计划，这些组件经过经验验证，但设计灵活，以匹配各种背景和学生群体。建议，以支持学校实施和维持循证实践。
Treatment fidelity, or the application of an intervention as it is designed, is a critical issue for the successful implementation of evidence-based practices. Typically it is assumed that evidence-based practices implemented with high fidelity will result in improved outcomes, whereas low fidelity will lead to poorer outcomes. These assumptions presume agreement across researchers and practitioners on what fidelity is, how to measure it, and what level of fidelity optimizes outcomes; however, there is no widespread agreement on any of these issues. This article discusses the dimensions and nuances of treatment fidelity as well as the implications for measuring and analyzing it in relation to student outcomes. The authors review research demonstrating the differential relationship of fidelity across schools, program type, and impact on student outcomes that special educators should consider when designing intervention studies and implementing evidence-based practices. Special educators should prioritize practices and programs with clearly identified components that are empirically validated yet designed flexibly to match various contexts and student populations. Suggestions to support schools in implementing and sustaining evidence-based practices are provided.