More than the sum of its parts: a multiple case study on the implementation of RTI in five sites

textUsing a multiple-gating procedure, 5 research sites (3 elementary and 2 middle schools) were identified as implementing a Response to Intervention (RTI) framework. This study uses a multiple case study design to describe the RTI implementation in reading at these 5 sites. Findings suggest that the sites studied are utilizing a hybrid model (a combination of standard treatment protocol and problem solving models) for developing and assigning reading interventions. The five sites implemented critical components of RTI (universal screening, progress monitoring, scientifically-based core curriculum, and a multi-tiered system of interventions) similarly, despite differences in campus-level variables. However, no site implemented a process for assessing the fidelity of implementation of the RTI framework. They also followed state and/or district guidelines on the use of RTI data in special education eligibility decisions.Special Educatio

A Synthesis of Read-Aloud Interventions on Early Reading Outcomes Among Preschool Through Third Graders at Risk for Reading Difficulties

A synthesis and meta-analysis of the extant research on the effects of storybook read-aloud interventions for children at risk for reading difficulties ages 3 to 8 is provided. A total of 29 studies met criteria for the synthesis, with 18 studies providing sufficient data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Read-aloud instruction has been examined using dialogic reading; repeated reading of stories; story reading with limited questioning before, during, and/or after reading; computer-assisted story reading; and story reading with extended vocabulary activities. Significant, positive effects on children’s language, phonological awareness, print concepts, comprehension, and vocabulary outcomes were found. Despite the positive effects for read-aloud interventions, only a small amount of outcome variance was accounted for by intervention type

Positive risk-taking: Mixed-methods validation of a self-report scale and evidence for genetic links to personality and negative risk-taking

Adolescents are more likely to take risks. Typically, research on adolescent risk-taking has focused on its negative health and societal consequences. However, some risk-taking behaviors might be positive, defined here as behavior that does not violate the rights of others and that might advance socially-valuable goals. Empirical work on positive risk-taking has been limited by measurement challenges. In this study, we elicited adolescents’ free responses (n = 75) about a time they took a risk. Based on thematic coding, we identified positive behaviors described as risks and selected items to form a self-report scale. The resulting positive risk-taking scale was quantitatively validated in a population-based sample of adolescent twins (n = 1249). Second, we evaluated associations between positive risk-taking, negative risk-taking, and potential personality and peer correlates using a genetically informed design. Sensation seeking predicted negative and positive risk-taking equally strongly, whereas extraversion differentiated forms of risk-taking. Additive genetic influences on personality accounted for the total heritability in positive risk-taking. Indirect pathways from personality through positive and negative peer environments were identified. These results provide promising evidence that personality factors of sensation seeking and extraversion can manifest as engagement in positive risks. Increased understanding of positive manifestations of adolescent risk-taking may yield targets for positive youth development strategies to bolster youth well-being

Clinical trial enrollment at a rural satellite hospital during COVID-19 pandemic

Controlled clinical trials (CCTs) have traditionally been limited to urban academic clinical centers. Implementation of CCTs in rural setting is challenged by lack of resources, the inexperience of patient care team members in CCT conductance and workflow interruption, and global inexperience with remote data monitoring

Why Has Personality Psychology Played an Outsized Role in the Credibility Revolution?

Personality is not the most popular subfield of psychology. But, in one way or another, personality psychologists have played an outsized role in the ongoing “credibility revolution” in psychology. Not only have individual personality psychologists taken on visible roles in the movement, but our field’s practices and norms have now become models for other fields to emulate (or, for those who share Baumeister’s (2016) skeptical view of the consequences of increasing rigor, a model for what to avoid). In this article we discuss some unique features of our field that may have placed us in an ideal position to be leaders in this movement. We do so from a subjective perspective, describing our impressions and opinions about possible explanations for personality psychology’s disproportionate role in the credibility revolution. We also discuss some ways in which personality psychology remains less-than-optimal, and how we can address these flaws