Ronnie Detrich Randy Keyworth Jack States Wing Institute

1. From Research to Practice: An Analysis of the Interaction between the Research Community and Special Education Services Ronnie Detrich Randy Keyworth Jack States Wing Institute

2. Issues of Culture and Evidence-based Practice • Implementing evidence-based interventions in special education programs is a cultural practice. • Currently, this practice is not well established within the culture of special education. Why Not? • What is necessary and sufficient to support this practice? • In an evidence-based culture it is necessary to have evidence. • Evidence alone is not sufficient. • Relevant contingencies are necessary.

3. Cultural Practice • Cultural practice is defined as the interlocking behavior of two or more persons that produce a specific outcome, i.e., implementing evidence-based interventions (Glenn, 1988). • This outcome is generally not possible by individuals acting alone. • The behavior of each person is maintained by individual consequences. • The cultural practice is maintained by the aggregate outcome of the behavior of the individuals.

4. Participants in the Cultural Practice • Researchers • Practitioners • If we are to influence a cultural practice (implementing evidence-based interventions) then we need to understand the contingencies of the individuals who are interacting.

5. Evidence-based Education Research Replicability Sustainability Practice

6. Researchers Publication Promotion and tenure Funding cycles Practitioners Legal Regulatory Policy Budget Contingencies on Researchers and Practitioners

7. Contingencies on Researchers • Publication • Original research • Experimentally well controlled • Promotion and Tenure • High level of productivity: publication rates is one of the primary measures. • Funding Cycles • Typically three year cycles.

8. Effects of Contingencies on Researchers • Greater emphasis on efficacy than effectiveness. • Journals and promotion and tenure rules place greater value on original research. • Effectiveness research is essentially replication research. • Short funding cycles encourage efficacy research. • Typically efficacy requires less time and resources than effectiveness research, resulting in higher rates of published research. • Questions related to generality (external validity) are slow to be answered.

9. Efficacy Research(What Works?) • Largely concerned with integrity of independent variable (internal validity). • Research is often conducted in analog settings where all relevant variables can be controlled. • Studies conducted by well trained graduate students and research assistants. • Very close oversight to assure integrity. • Funded by research grants.

10. Impact of Efficacy Research on Practitioners • Often seen as: • Irrelevant because of the analog nature of the work (“not the real world”). • Impractical because of the level of training required. • Impossible because of the resources required. • Researchers are engaged in behavior that is not always highly valued by practitioners in the culture.

11. Dissemination of Research and the Practitioner • The contingencies associated with promotion and tenure encourage dissemination through professional journals. • Studies published across a large number of journals make it difficult for practitioners to have breadth of knowledge in a particular area. • There are no direct contingencies on researchers to make results available to practitioners. • Interaction largely between researchers rather than researchers and practitioners.

12. Dissemination of Research and the Practitioner • What Works Clearinghouse and Campbell Collaboration are recent attempts to make evidence available to practitioners in usable form. • Current limitations with clearinghouse approach • Standards for quantity and quality of research. • It is necessary for practitioners to have data now or will use other criteria to determine interventions. • There is not always a large body of evidence. • High quality data not always available. • Must address issue between most rigorous evidence and best available evidence.

13. Contingencies on Practitioners • Practitioners responsible to provide educational services for all children (IDEA). • Eligibility categories for special education are very broad and are not diagnostic categories. • Researchers often narrow characteristics of students for the purpose of research. • As an example, Learning Disabilities includes a very broad range of characteristics and is not particularly meaningful when developing an intervention for a specific student. • Students in special education programs often have co-morbid conditions which may limit effects of a particular intervention. • Data are not readily available for effective interventions for students with co-morbid conditions because researchers exclude these students from studies.

14. Contingencies on Practitioners • An insufficient number of practitioners have necessary training to implement evidence-based interventions. • Failure to have well trained, qualified staff will result in something other than evidence-based interventions being implemented. • Even if well trained, necessary resources may not be in place to support evidence-based interventions. • An insufficient number of decision makers have necessary skills to evaluate research and translate research to practice.

15. Contingencies on Practitioners • Evidence-based interventions may be more costly than categorical, “generic” services, i.e., early intensive behavioral interventions for children with autism, resulting in decisions to provide more costly services only following litigation. • Evidence-based interventions may be seen as a fad and discounted without examination.

16. Do We Have the Necessary Conditions for Evidence-based Culture? • Not yet. • Interlocking contingencies between researchers and practitioners not readily apparent. • Very little research on bridging research and practice (Schoenwald & Hoagwood, 2001; Ringeisen, Henderson, & Hoagwood, 2003).

17. Where to Start? • Addressing motivation of practitioners to implement evidence-based interventions. • No Child Left Behind • Programmatic research related to“Goodness of fit” between an intervention and the setting in which it is to occur (one size does not fit all). • Identify contingencies that promote sustainability. • Establish evidence-based interventions for assuring treatment integrity and necessary levels of integrity to have an effect. • Contingencies that support effectiveness research (funding, publication guidelines, etc.)

18. Where to Start? • Pre-service training emphasizing evidence-based interventions. • Multiple methods and multiple groups evaluating research with transparent standards. • Distinguish between best evidence and best available evidence. • Establish a continuum of rigor that reflects current contingencies influencing practitioners. • Increase interaction between researchers and practitioners. • And then…interlocking behavior for all.

19. Evidence-based Education Research Replicability Sustainability Practice