Project Activities
The researchers tested the efficacy of DBI-TLC with three cohorts of elementary special education and intervention teachers. Students (most in first through third grade) with intensive early writing needs in the participating teachers' classes were identified for participation in the study. The researchers randomly assigned participating teachers within schools to receive DBI-TLC or to a business-as-usual control condition. DBI-TLC teachers received the intervention and implemented DBI with the participating students for 20 weeks. Student and teacher data were collected at baseline and immediately following the intervention. Observational and interview data were collected from teachers in the first two cohorts in the years after they received the intervention. Data were analyzed to determine the efficacy of DBI-TLC on teacher and student outcomes, with additional analyses to understand teachers' experience with and sustainability of DBI.
Structured Abstract
Setting
This study was conducted in 23 public school districts in Minnesota and Missouri. Participating school districts included students from a wide range of socio-economic and cultural backgrounds in urban, suburban, and rural settings.
Sample
The project involved 132 elementary special education teachers and 309 of their students in first through third grade with intensive writing needs (two to three students per teacher).
DBI-TLC is a professional development intervention that provides teachers with tools, learning modules, and collaborative support to implement DBI. DBI involves (1) establishing current levels of student performance and setting long-term goals; (2) implementing high-quality interventions to address individual needs and monitoring progress toward goals; (3) applying specific decision rules to determine whether to adjust instruction; (4) developing hypotheses about student needs and making changes based on those hypotheses; and (5) continuing this process to meet students' needs. The tools component of the intervention includes a DBI manual; curriculum-based measures (CBM) for early writing, including administration, scoring, and graphing guidelines; research-based early writing interventions, including lesson plans and materials; and decision-making tools, including diagnostic checklists and a decision-making rubric. In the learning component of the intervention, researchers led four face-to-face workshops with opportunities to learn and practice the DBI steps. Finally, the collaborative support component of the intervention consists of opportunities to engage with peers and DBI coaches to receive implementation assistance and problem-solving supports.
Research design and methods
The researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy of the DBI-TLC intervention. Three cohorts of teachers were randomly assigned to receive the DBI-TLC intervention or to a business-as-usual control group. Each year, students in the participating teachers' classrooms were screened using CBM for beginning writers and the lowest scoring two to three students for each teacher were selected to participate in the study. Teachers assigned to receive DBI-TLC participated in professional development and implemented DBI with these students for 20 weeks. Student and teacher data were collected at baseline and immediately following the intervention for all three cohorts of teachers to determine the efficacy of DBI-TLC for improving teacher and student outcomes and the potential moderating effect of teacher and student characteristics. Observational and interview data were collected from the first two cohorts of teachers after they receive the intervention to determine the extent to which they sustain DBI (2 years of follow-up data were collected for Cohort 1, 1 year of follow-up data were collected for Cohort 2).
Control condition
The business-as-usual control condition received their typical professional development activities and implemented their typical writing instruction.
Key measures
Students were screened for eligibility using the CBM for beginning writers. Teacher outcome measures included a combination of observational and self-report measures of teachers' DBI knowledge and skills, self-efficacy, DBI fidelity and dosage, and sustained use of DBI over time. Student outcomes included CBM for beginning writers and performance on a standardized assessment of writing achievement, the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement writing subtests. Observational data was collected on intervention and control teachers' overall writing instruction.
Data analytic strategy
The researchers used hierarchical linear modeling with students nested within teachers to examine the impact of DBI-TLC on teacher and student outcomes. Analyses explored potential moderating effects of grade level, race/ethnicity, special education, and English Learner status as well as the relation of teacher knowledge and skills, self-efficacy, and implementation fidelity to student outcomes. The researchers conducted descriptive and qualitative analyses of the observational and interview data, including comprehensive descriptions and comparisons based on teachers' characteristics, writing instruction, fidelity of DBI, fidelity of DBI-TLC, and sustainability of DBI.
Cost analysis strategy
A cost analysis was still in process at the time of the grant’s closure.
Key outcomes
The main findings of this project, as reported by the principal investigator, are as follows:
- Teachers who received DBI-TLC significantly outperformed control teachers on a measure of DBI Knowledge and Skills. They also outperformed control teachers on a measure of personal efficacy for writing instruction, but not on general efficacy.
- Students whose teachers implemented DBI in early writing significantly outperformed controls on measures closely aligned with the intervention as well as a standardized writing assessment. These effects did not vary based on whether students received special education, English Language service, their race/ethnicity, or their grade level.
- Many teachers who received DBI-TLC continued to implement at least some components of DBI in early writing after their participation in the project, even during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. They identified facilitators (such as value of student data to inform instruction) and barriers (such as limited time) to their sustained implementation.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Project contributors
Products and publications
Project website:
Study registration:
Publications:
ERIC Citations: Find available citations in ERIC for this award here.
Select Publications:
McMaster, K. L., Birinci, S., Shanahan, E., & Lembke, E. (2023). Supporting students’ early writing development through data-based instruction. In S. Q. Cabell, S. B. Neuman, & N. P. Terry (Eds.) Handbook on the Science of Early Literacy. Guilford Press.
Lembke, E., McMaster, K., McKevett, N., Simpson, J., & Birinci, S. (2021). Innovations in early writing assessment and intervention. In Cook, B., Tankersley, M., & Landrum, T. Advances in Learning and Behavior Disabilities. Emerald Insight.
Choi, S., Shanahan, E., An, J., & McMaster, K. L. (2023). Monitoring elementary students’ progress using word dictation: Technical features of slope and growth analysis. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 48(4), 201-210.
Shanahan, E., McMaster, K. L., Bresina, B. C., McKevett, N. M., Choi, S., & Lembke, E. S. (2023). Teacher predictors of student progress in data-based writing instruction: Knowledge, skills, beliefs, and instructional fidelity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194231157720
Lam, E. A., Kunkel, A. K., McKevett, N. M., & McMaster, K. L. (2021). Intensifying instruction to meet students’ early writing needs. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 00400599211005165.
Poch, A. L., Allen, A. A., Jung, P. G., Lembke, E. S., & McMaster, K. L. (2021). Using data-based instruction to support struggling elementary writers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 10534512211014835.
Available data:
Data will be made publicly available on LDBase, a Learning and Development Data Repository: https://www.ldbase.org/
Related projects
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
