ABSTRACT Scaling up evidence‐based educational interventions presents challenges, particularly in adapting to new contexts while maintaining fidelity. Structured adaptations that integrate the strengths of experimental science (high fidelity) and improvement science (high adaptation) represent a novel design framework for supporting the equitable implementation of research‐based practices and programs. This preregistered study examined the effectiveness of structured adaptations to a Tier 1 content literacy intervention, Modeling of Reading Engagement (MORE), on Grade 3 students' ( N = 1914) engagement in asynchronous digital app and print‐based reading activities, the quality of synchronous student–teacher interactions during Zoom‐delivered lessons, and student learning outcomes during the COVID‐19 school closures. Using a cluster randomized trial design, 95 teachers and their students in 26 elementary schools were randomly assigned to either a high‐fidelity core treatment or a structured adaptation condition. In the latter, teachers participated in Team‐Based Learning activities that tightly coupled knowledge acquisition and application, with a focus on improving student engagement. Students in the structured adaptations condition outperformed students in the core treatment condition on science reading comprehension (ES = 0.07) and science background knowledge (ES = 0.09). Implementation analyses of the synchronous lessons indicate that the structured adaptations also improved norms of social interaction between students and teachers, resulting in stronger engagement, better feedback, and dialogic questioning. These findings suggest the importance of intentionally building in opportunities for teachers to adapt instruction within a clear framework. When teachers have support to work together and combine research‐based strategies with classroom knowledge, they can more effectively engage students and improve learning outcomes.
Relyea et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: