检查教学层之间的相互作用:第一层的特征是否预测学生对第二层数学干预的反应?

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Learning Disabilities Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/00222194221102644
Marah Sutherland, Taylor Lesner, Derek Kosty, Cayla Lussier, Keith Smolkowski, Jessica Turtura, Christian T Doabler, Ben Clarke
{"title":"检查教学层之间的相互作用:第一层的特征是否预测学生对第二层数学干预的反应?","authors":"Marah Sutherland,&nbsp;Taylor Lesner,&nbsp;Derek Kosty,&nbsp;Cayla Lussier,&nbsp;Keith Smolkowski,&nbsp;Jessica Turtura,&nbsp;Christian T Doabler,&nbsp;Ben Clarke","doi":"10.1177/00222194221102644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>High-quality Tier 1 instruction is frequently conceptualized as the \"foundation\" for other tiers of intervention within multitiered systems of support (MTSS) models. However, the vast majority of Tier 2 intervention studies do not account for Tier 1 variables when examining intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to examine Tier 1 predictors, or \"quality indicators,\" of differential responsiveness to Tier 2 mathematics intervention. Data were drawn from a large-scale data set where all teachers taught the Early Learning in Mathematics (Tier 1) core program across the academic year, and a subset of students were selected for the ROOTS (Tier 2) mathematics intervention. We examined the following Tier 1 variables: (a) classroom-level mathematics gains, (b) Tier 1 fidelity of implementation, (c) Tier 1 classroom management and instructional support, and (d) class size. Response to Tier 2 intervention was not significantly predicted by any of the Tier 1 variables examined; however, the pattern of Hedges' <i>g</i> effect sizes suggested that students with higher quality of Tier 1 instruction tended to benefit less from the Tier 2 ROOTS intervention. Results are discussed in the context of implications for research and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"56 4","pages":"243-256"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining Interactions Across Instructional Tiers: Do Features of Tier 1 Predict Student Responsiveness to Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention?\",\"authors\":\"Marah Sutherland,&nbsp;Taylor Lesner,&nbsp;Derek Kosty,&nbsp;Cayla Lussier,&nbsp;Keith Smolkowski,&nbsp;Jessica Turtura,&nbsp;Christian T Doabler,&nbsp;Ben Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00222194221102644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>High-quality Tier 1 instruction is frequently conceptualized as the \\\"foundation\\\" for other tiers of intervention within multitiered systems of support (MTSS) models. However, the vast majority of Tier 2 intervention studies do not account for Tier 1 variables when examining intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to examine Tier 1 predictors, or \\\"quality indicators,\\\" of differential responsiveness to Tier 2 mathematics intervention. Data were drawn from a large-scale data set where all teachers taught the Early Learning in Mathematics (Tier 1) core program across the academic year, and a subset of students were selected for the ROOTS (Tier 2) mathematics intervention. We examined the following Tier 1 variables: (a) classroom-level mathematics gains, (b) Tier 1 fidelity of implementation, (c) Tier 1 classroom management and instructional support, and (d) class size. Response to Tier 2 intervention was not significantly predicted by any of the Tier 1 variables examined; however, the pattern of Hedges' <i>g</i> effect sizes suggested that students with higher quality of Tier 1 instruction tended to benefit less from the Tier 2 ROOTS intervention. Results are discussed in the context of implications for research and practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"volume\":\"56 4\",\"pages\":\"243-256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221102644\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221102644","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高质量的第1层指导经常被概念化为多层支持系统(MTSS)模型中其他干预层的“基础”。然而,绝大多数二级干预研究在检查干预效果时没有考虑一级变量。本研究的目的是检验第1层预测因子,或“质量指标”,对第2层数学干预的差异反应。数据来自一个大型数据集,其中所有教师在整个学年中教授数学早期学习(第1层)核心课程,并选择一部分学生进行ROOTS(第2层)数学干预。我们检查了以下第一级变量:(a)课堂水平的数学成绩,(b)第一级实施的保真度,(c)第一级课堂管理和教学支持,以及(d)班级规模。对二级干预的反应没有被任何一级变量显著预测;然而,Hedges的g效应量模式表明,一级教学质量较高的学生往往从二级ROOTS干预中获益较少。结果在研究和实践的意义的背景下进行讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Examining Interactions Across Instructional Tiers: Do Features of Tier 1 Predict Student Responsiveness to Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention?

High-quality Tier 1 instruction is frequently conceptualized as the "foundation" for other tiers of intervention within multitiered systems of support (MTSS) models. However, the vast majority of Tier 2 intervention studies do not account for Tier 1 variables when examining intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to examine Tier 1 predictors, or "quality indicators," of differential responsiveness to Tier 2 mathematics intervention. Data were drawn from a large-scale data set where all teachers taught the Early Learning in Mathematics (Tier 1) core program across the academic year, and a subset of students were selected for the ROOTS (Tier 2) mathematics intervention. We examined the following Tier 1 variables: (a) classroom-level mathematics gains, (b) Tier 1 fidelity of implementation, (c) Tier 1 classroom management and instructional support, and (d) class size. Response to Tier 2 intervention was not significantly predicted by any of the Tier 1 variables examined; however, the pattern of Hedges' g effect sizes suggested that students with higher quality of Tier 1 instruction tended to benefit less from the Tier 2 ROOTS intervention. Results are discussed in the context of implications for research and practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.
期刊最新文献
Do Mathematics and Reading Skills Impact Student Science Outcomes? Considerations for Intensifying Word-Problem Interventions for Students With MD: A Qualitative Umbrella Review of Relevant Meta-Analyses. Domain-General and Domain-Specific Antecedents of Pre-Algebraic Knowledge: Focusing on English-Language Learners With Word-Problem Difficulty. The Role of Morphology and Sentence Context in Word Processing for Adults With Low Literacy. Specificity, Co-Occurrence, and Growth: Math and Reading Skill Development in Children With Learning Disabilities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1