Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 16 No. 1 (2025): Pedagogy as a science between theory and empiricism

Implementation Fidelity as a Multidimensional Construct: Implications for Educational Research and Practice

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess1-2025oa19752
Submitted
marzo 15, 2025
Published
2025-06-26

Abstract

This paper explores implementation fidelity in educational research, highlighting the concept’s evolution from simple adherence to a multidimensional construct. In the context of evidence-based education, measuring fidelity is crucial to determine whether intervention outcomes actually derive from the program itself or from inadequate implementation. The analysis addresses the tension between rigorous fidelity and contextual adaptation, revealing how contemporary conceptualizations move beyond this dichotomy, recognizing that adaptation can be necessary when it preserves the intervention’s core mechanisms. Empirical research suggests that moderate levels of fidelity may be sufficient to achieve positive outcomes, and in some cases, educators asked to make larger changes implement with greater fidelity. The contribution emphasizes the importance of developing interventions with clearly identified but flexible core components, promoting an understanding of fidelity that balances methodological rigor with contextual sensitivity.

References

  1. Aarons G. A., Hurlburt M., & Horwitz S. M. (2011). Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(1): 4-23.
  2. Aarons G. A., Sklar M., Mustanski B., Benbow N., & Brown C. H. (2017). “Scaling-out” evidence-based interventions to new populations or new health care delivery systems. Implementation Science, 12(1), 111.
  3. Albers B., & Pattuwage L. (2017). Implementation in Education: Findings from a Scoping Review. Centre for Evidence and Implementation.
  4. Anderson E. R. (2017). Accommodating change: Relating fidelity of implementation to program fit in educational reforms. American Educational Research Journal, 54(6): 1288-1315.
  5. Buyse R. (1935). L’expérimentation en pédagogie. Lamertin.
  6. Carroll C., Patterson M., Wood S., Booth A., Rick J., & Balain S. (2007). A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation science, 2: 1-9.
  7. Castro F. G., Barrera M., & Martinez C. R. (2004). The cultural adaptation of prevention interventions: Resolving tensions between fidelity and fit. Prevention Science, 5(1): 41-45.
  8. Century J., Rudnick M., & Freeman C. (2010). A framework for measuring fidelity of implementation: A foundation for shared language and accumulation of knowledge. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(2): 199-218.
  9. Damschroder L. J., Aron D. C., Keith R. E., Kirsh S. R., Alexander J. A., & Lowery J. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4(1), 50.
  10. Damschroder L. J., Reardon C. M., Widerquist M. A. O., & Lowery J. (2022). The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implementation science, 17(1), 7.
  11. Dane A. V., & Schneider B. H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early second-ary prevention: Are implementation effects out of control?. Clinical Psychology Review, 18(1): 23-45.
  12. Durlak J. A., & DuPre E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3-4): 327-350.
  13. Dusenbury L., Brannigan R., Falco M., & Hansen W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2): 237-256.
  14. Harn B. A., Damico D. P., & Stoolmiller M. (2017). Examining the variation of fidelity across an intervention: Implications for measuring and evaluating student learning. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(4): 289-302.
  15. Harn B., Parisi D., & Stoolmiller M. (2013). Balancing fidelity with flexibility and fit: What do we really know about fidelity of implementation in schools?. Exceptional Children, 79(2): 181-193.
  16. Hill H. C., & Erickson A. (2019). Using implementation fidelity to aid in interpreting program impacts: A brief review. Educational Researcher, 48(9): 590-598.
  17. Kim J. S., Burkhauser M. A., Quinn D. M., Guryan J., Kingston H. C., & Aleman K. (2017). Effectiveness of structured teacher adaptations to an evidence-based summer literacy program. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4): 443-467.
  18. Lemire C., Rousseau M., & Dionne C. (2023). A comparison of fidelity implementation frameworks used in the field of early intervention. American Journal of Evaluation, 44(2): 236-252.
  19. Low S., Smolkowski K., & Cook C. (2016). What constitutes high-quality implementation of SEL programs? A latent class analysis of Second Step implementation. Prevention Science, 17(8): 981-991.
  20. Lynch S., & O’Donnell C. (2005). The evolving definition, measurement, and conceptualization of fidelity of implementation in scale-up of highly rated science curriculum units in diverse middle schools. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
  21. Lyon A. R., & Bruns E. J. (2019). From evidence to impact: Joining our best school mental health practices with our best implementation strategies. School Mental Health, 11(1): 106-114.
  22. Martinez R. G., Lewis C. C., & Weiner B. J. (2014). Instrumentation issues in imple-mentation science. Implementation Science, 9(1): 118.
  23. McLaughlin M. W. (1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy imple-mentation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2): 171-178.
  24. Mowbray C. T., Holter M. C., Teague G. B., & Bybee D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(3): 315-340.
  25. Odom S. L., Fleming K., Diamond K., Lieber J., Hanson M., Butera G., Horn E., Palm-er S., & Marquis J. (2010). Examining different forms of implementation and in early childhood curriculum research. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(3): 314-328.
  26. Pas E. T., & Bradshaw C. P. (2012). Examining the association between implementation and outcomes: State-wide scale-up of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 39(4): 417-433.
  27. Perez D., Van der Stuyft P., Zabala M. C., Castro M., & Lefèvre P. (2016). A modified theoretical framework to assess implementation fidelity of adaptive public health interventions. Implementation Science, 11(1), 91.
  28. Quinn D. M., & Kim J. S. (2017). Scaffolding fidelity and adaptation in educational program implementation: Experimental evidence from a literacy intervention. American Educational Research Journal, 54(6): 1187-1220.
  29. Roen K., Arai L., Roberts H., & Popay J. (2006). Extending systematic reviews to include evidence on implementation: methodological work on a review of community-based initiatives to prevent injuries. Social science & medicine, 63(4): 1060-1071.
  30. Spillane J. P., Reiser B. J., & Reimer T. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72(3): 387-431.
  31. Stirman S. W., Baumann A. A., & Miller, C J. (2019). The FRAME: an expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications to evidence-based interventions. Implementation Science, 14(1), 58.
  32. von Thiele Schwarz U., Aarons G. A., & Hasson H. (2019). The Value Equation: Three complementary propositions for reconciling fidelity and adaptation in evidence-based practice implementation. BMC Health Services Research, 19: 1-10.
  33. Webster-Stratton C., Reinke W. M., Herman K. C., & Newcomer L. L. (2011). The incredible years teacher classroom management training: The methods and principles that support fidelity of training delivery. School Psychology Review, 40(4): 509-529.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...