What interventions are cost-effective? A systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of school-based programs from 2000 to 2020.

The extent to which evidence-based practices (EBPs) are considered cost-effective influences educators' adoption decisions. However, what it means to be cost-effective and how to interpret cost-effectiveness ratios may be unclear. This systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of EBPs in schools illuminates the many sources of variability in published estimates. Studies were limited to peer-reviewed, school-based studies conducted in the United States between 2000 and 2020. Seven studies examining eight programs were identified and then coded for program descriptions, outcomes, research designs, and cost-effectiveness methodology. Secondary analyses illustrated how published estimates can be adjusted to reduce methodological variability and increase the utility of comparisons. The small number of studies highlights the need for research to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of more EBPs. Implications for research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Examination of a Modified Incremental Rehearsal Approach to Explore Causal Mechanisms.

Incremental rehearsal (IR) has consistently been shown to improve students' math fact retention and fluency (Maki et al., Journal of Behavioral Education 30:534-558, 2021). However, less is known about how intervention modifications may support longer-term skill maintenance. The purpose of this study was to compare traditional IR with a modified IR (shuffle IR; ShIR) in which known multiplication facts were shuffled between sequences using a cumulative acquisition design with six fourth- and fifth-grade students. All participants retained and maintained more facts in IR and ShIR compared to a control condition. However, IR or ShIR did not consistently result in greater retention than the other, with three students demonstrating greater retention in the IR condition and three students demonstrating greater retention in the ShIR condition. Most participants demonstrated greater fact maintenance in the ShIR condition than in the IR condition. All participants made fewer intervention session errors in the condition in which they retained more multiplication facts.

Reading fluency intervention dosage: A novel meta-analysis and research synthesis.

Reading fluency is a fundamental component of reading proficiency, and yet, it is a common area of need for students demonstrating reading difficulties. In response, reading fluency interventions have been researched and implemented relatively extensively, but how much intervention is needed to affect reading fluency growth is not clear. The purpose of this study was to meta-analyze and synthesize the research base regarding targeted reading fluency interventions for kindergarten through 12th grade students and to examine how intervention dosage is conceptualized and measured in these interventions. Thirty-three articles met the study inclusion criteria, and overall effects of reading fluency interventions were moderate (effect size = 0.46, 95% CI [0.23, 0.68], p < .001), with study design (group design ES = 0.41, single case design ES = 0.75) and study rigor moderating study effects (group design met standards ES = 0.57, group design did not meet standards ES = 0.34, single case design met standards ES = 0.79, single case design did not meet standards ES = 0.57). Most studies conceptualized and reported intervention dosage as the amount of time spent in intervention with intervention duration impacting total intervention growth. Implications for practice and research are discussed, particularly the need for additional research examining proximal measurement of intervention dosage in an effort to best understand how opportunities to practice impact reading fluency growth.

Dual discrepancy/consistency pattern of strengths and weaknesses method of specific learning disability identification: Classification accuracy when combining clinical judgment with assessment data.

The Dual Discrepancy/Consistency (DD/C) pattern of strengths and weaknesses (PSW) method is the most prominent "other alternative research-based procedure" used to identify a specific learning disability (SLD). The DD/C method is intended to be used with multiple data sources, but no research has examined identification decision making using the DD/C PSW analysis of cognitive and academic achievement test scores with other assessment data (e.g., pre-referral intervention data, parent/teacher reports, observations, evaluation of exclusionary factors). This study used an experimental vignette methodology to investigate school psychologists' (N = 343) identification decision making using the DD/C method with multiple data sources. Results showed that school psychologist participants made highly accurate (97.50%) identification decisions when both cognitive and achievement test score patterns and other assessment data were clearly indicative of SLD, but that overall identification accuracy was only 65.60%. Participants made less accurate identification decisions when examining test score data that did not meet DD/C PSW criteria for SLD than when examining test score data that did. Participants made less accurate decisions when other assessment data (interpreted in conjunction with test scores) did not meet DD/C PSW criteria for SLD or were ambiguous than when they did. In addition, male school psychologists were less likely to make accurate identification decisions than female school psychologists, and participants who were Nationally Certified School Psychologists were less likely to make accurate identification decisions than those who were not. Last, more experience with DD/C resulted in less accurate identification decisions, and participants who made accurate decisions reported higher levels of confidence, although the effect size was negligible. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Language used in school psychological evaluation reports as predictors of SLD identification within a response to intervention model.

Despite decades of research, much is still unknown regarding how specific learning disability (SLD) identification decisions are made, particularly how language related to sociodemographic and psychosocial factors may impact decision-making. This study employed the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) method to examine the language used in school psychological reports to better understand how sociodemographic (i.e., race, socioeconomic background, and gender) and psychosocial factors (e.g., positive and negative emotion, student effort, and student social processes) related to SLD identification within a Response to Intervention (RtI) identification method. The reports of students identified as SLD contained significantly more achievement-related language (e.g., hardworking, motivated, exerting effort) compared to students who were not identified as SLD, and achievement-related language was associated with SLD identification above and beyond RtI evaluation data (i.e., academic achievement and slope). Implications for research and practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

An examination of the relationships between specific learning disabilities identification and growth rate, achievement, cognitive ability, and student demographics.

Students with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) represent a large proportion of those receiving special education services in U.S. schools, but the relationship between student-level variables and SLD identification is still not well understood. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which data collected as part of a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation were associated with SLD identification status. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine how response to intervention (RtI) slope (i.e., growth rate), academic achievement, global cognitive ability, and demographic variables (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, and free/reduced-price lunch [FRL] status) were related to SLD identification. Academic achievement (B = -0.13, OR = 0.88), race/ethnicity (B = -1.35, OR = 0.26; 0 = white student, 1 = student of color), and FRL (B = 0.94, OR = 2.57) were related to SLD status, but global cognitive ability and RtI slope were not, even though the RtI method was reported to be used during the special education decision-making process. Implications for practice, particularly related to the use of RtI, are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Comparison of Reading Growth Among Students With Severe Reading Deficits Who Received Intervention to Typically Achieving Students and Students Receiving Special Education.

This study compared the reading growth of students with and without learning disabilities, and students with and without reading deficits in response to tier 2 reading interventions within a response-to-intervention framework. Participants were 499 second- and third-grade students in six urban schools. Students who scored at or below the 10th percentile on the fall reading screening assessment were identified as having a severe reading deficit and received a tier 2 reading intervention that was targeted to their needs. Results showed a significant effect between groups on reading growth. Students with severe reading deficits receiving targeted tier 2 intervention grew at a rate that equaled the rate of growth of students without reading deficits and was significantly higher than students who were receiving special education services for reading. Implications for practice, suggestions for future research, and study limitations are discussed.

A national survey of school psychologists' practices in identifying specific learning disabilities.

This study examined the identification frameworks, specific models, and assessment practices used by school psychologists to identify students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) in public schools in the United States. We surveyed school psychologist practitioners using an online survey, conducted a review of state regulations addressing SLD, and evaluated the effects of state-level policies and school psychologists' characteristics on identification practices. Responses from more than 1,300 school psychologists revealed that multiple SLD identification frameworks are utilized and that state regulations generally have stronger effects on identification practices than do characteristics such as school psychologists' age, highest degree obtained, and years of experience. Frameworks with well-known psychometric limitations, such as those employing intelligence-achievement discrepancy formulas, remain commonly employed. We encourage more and better scientific research into both the conceptual and psychometric outcomes associated with SLD identification frameworks and urge application of evidence-based practices in the assessment and treatment of academic deficits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Comparison of progress monitoring data from general outcome measures and specific subskill mastery measures for reading.

Interventionists often monitor the progress of students receiving supplemental interventions with general outcome measures (GOMs) such as curriculum-based measurement of reading (CBM-R). However, some researchers have suggested that interventionists should collect data more closely related to instructional targets, specific subskill mastery measures (SSMMs) because outcomes from GOMs such as CBM-R may not be sufficiently sensitive to gauge intervention effects. In turn, interventionists may prematurely terminate an effective intervention or continue to deliver an ineffective intervention if they do not monitor student progress with the appropriate measure. However, such recommendations are based upon expert opinion or studies with serious methodological shortcomings. We used multi-variate multilevel modeling to compare pre-intervention intercepts and intervention slopes between GOM and SSMM data collected concurrently in a sample of 96 first, 44 second, and 53 third grade students receiving tier 2 phonics interventions. Statistically significant differences were observed between slopes from SSMM consonant-vowel-consonant words and CBM-R data. Statistically significant differences in slopes were not observed for consonant blend, digraph or consonant-vowel-consonant-silent e (CVCe) SSMMs. Results suggest that using word lists to monitor student response to instruction for early struggling readers is beneficial but as students are exposed to more complex phonetic patterns, the distinction between SSMMs and CBM-R become less meaningful.

State special education criteria for identifying intellectual disability: A review following revised diagnostic criteria and Rosa's Law.

Across the last century, the condition known as intellectual disability (ID) has been labeled by assorted terms, its key features have varied, and recommendations for its identification have been divided. In light of recent changes to the diagnostic criteria for ID and to federal legislation, this study was designed to compile and summarize information about the state special education criteria for this condition and its associated assessment process, as they guide school-based and associated practices. Authors independently double-coded components of all ID regulations and guidelines from the 50 United States and the District of Columbia in pairs, which was then checked and corrected for inconsistencies. A total of 10% of states provided only the federal definition of ID. Intellectual disability was the most common term used across states, but it was used by only 63% of them. To meet the intellectual deficit criterion, 37% of states referenced a fixed IQ cutoff, and 49% referred to a flexible IQ cutoff. In contrast, most states did not refer to what score types or criteria should be referenced when identifying adaptive behavior deficits. The influence of the recently updated diagnostic criteria for ID and federal legislation was evident, as several patterns of changes were apparent since the last studies of this type. The assessment in intellectual functioning was more well defined than the assessment of adaptive behavior. Health-related features associated with ID were not commonly referenced. These results can inform school psychology practice, training, and related research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Learning disability identification consistency: The impact of methodology and student evaluation data.

Learning disability (LD) identification has long been controversial and has undergone substantive reform. This study examined the consistency of school psychologists' LD identification decisions across three identification methods and across student evaluation data conclusiveness levels. Data were collected from 376 practicing school psychologists from 22 states. Eighty-three percent (n = 313) of participants were female. Ninety-one percent (n = 342) of participants identified as Caucasian, 4% (n = 15) Latino, 1.3% (n = 5) African American, .8% (n = 3) Asian/Pacific Islander, .3% (n = 1) Native American/Alaskan Native, and 1.3% (n = 5) 2 or more races. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 9 conditions and used 1 type of identification method and examined 1 type of student evaluation data to determine if a student should be identified with LD. Results showed that overall identification consistency was somewhat low (73.7%, κ = .45) There were no differences in identification consistency across identification methods χ2(2, N = 376) = 3.78, p = .151, but there were differences in identification consistency across conclusiveness levels of student evaluation data χ2(2, N = 376) = 50.40, p = .0001. Implications for practice, training, and research are also discussed, including the need of school psychologists to consider psychometric issues in LD identification as well as the need to further research the impact of student data conclusiveness in LD identification. (PsycINFO Database Record

Accuracy of student performance while reading leveled books rated at their instructional level by a reading inventory.

Identifying a student's instructional level is necessary to ensure that students are appropriately challenged in reading. Informal reading inventories (IRIs) purport to assess the highest reading level at which a student can accurately decode and comprehend text. However, the use of IRIs in determining a student's instructional level has been questioned because of a lack of research. The current study examined the percentage of words read correctly with 64 second- and third-grade students while reading from texts at their instructional level as determined by an IRI. Students read for 1 min from three leveled texts that corresponded to their instructional level as measured by an IRI, and the percentage of words read correctly was recorded. The percentage read correctly correlated across the three books from r=.47 to r=.68 and instructional level categories correlated from tau=.59 to tau=.65. Percent agreement calculations showed that the categorical scores (frustration, instructional, and independent) for the three readings agreed approximately 67% to 70% of the time, which resulted in a kappa estimate of less than .50. Kappa coefficients of .70 are considered strong indicators of agreement. Moreover, more than half of the students with the lowest reading skills read at a frustration level when attempting to read books rated at their instructional level by an IRI. The current study questions how reliably and accurately IRIs identify students' instructional level for reading.

State learning disability eligibility criteria: A comprehensive review.

For many decades, discussions regarding the definition and identification of learning disabilities have been contentious; one result is the varied practices across states and school districts. This study reviewed learning disability (LD) regulations and guidelines from the 50 United States and the District of Columbia that were employed during 2013. Two authors independently coded components of all LD regulations and guidelines. Results showed considerable variability in the state policies and practices governing LD identification. Only 67% of states allow for use of the ability-achievement discrepancy approach, and 20% of states explicitly prohibit its use. Approximately 16% of states require the sole use of response to intervention (RtI) models in LD identification, and there is considerable variability in the guidance states provide regarding how to implement RtI models to identify LD. Finally, about half of states do not allow use of "pattern of strengths and weaknesses" (PSW) models, and most states allowing these models provide little information regarding ideal identification practices. These results can inform school psychology practice, training, and related research.