Defining Fidelity in the Curriculum for Agricultural Science Education (CASE)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.v66i2.93Keywords:
Curriculum for Agricultural Science Education, fidelity, deliveryAbstract
The purpose of the study was to explore the definition of fidelity in the delivery of the Curriculum for Agricultural Science Education (CASE). The conceptual framework utilized in this study was the key domains affecting curriculum fidelity. This framework has four parts focusing on (1) school context, (2) curriculum implementation systems, (3) curriculum implementers, and (4) audiences targeted. To address the research objectives of this study, a basic qualitative approach was used. Each participant represented a different state and were made up of teacher educators, high school educators, and state leaders for agricultural education. The participants were or previously had been high school agricultural educators. Several benefits of the CASE curriculum were identified by the participants of this study. The benefits identified included inquiry-based learning, resources for educators, and assistance for beginning or novice educators. Participants believed the curriculum was beneficial to agricultural educators no matter if they were beginning their careers or are established professionals. Future research should focus on how the lead teachers view the delivery of the CASE curriculum and to what level the curriculum needs to be delivered to reach teaching it with fidelity.
Downloads
References
Al Otaiba, S., & Fuchs, D. (2006). Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 414–431. https://doi:10.1177/00222194060390050401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390050401
Braun, V., & Clark, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 15–35. https://doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carroll, C, Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). A conceptual Framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2, 40. https://doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-2-40 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
Chen H, T., (1998). Theory-driven evaluations. Adv Educ Productivity 7, 15–34.
Copper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2003). Business Research Methods. (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Curriculum for Agricultural Science Education (2011). Understanding the CASE model. https://www.case4learning.org/about-case/vision.html
Curriculum for Agricultural Science Education. (n.d.). Mission and Vision. Retrieved on February 21, 2023 from https://www.case4learning.org/about-case/mission-and-vision/
de Leeuw, R.R., de Boar, A.A., & Minnaert, A.E.M.G. (2020). The proof of the intervention is in the implementation; a systematic review about implementation fidelity of classroom-based interventions facilitating social participation of students with social-emotional problems or behavioral difficulties. International Journal of Educational Research, 1, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100002
Durlak, J. A. (2010). The importance of doing well in whatever you do: A commentary on the special section, "implementation research in early childhood education." Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 348–357. https://doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.03.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.03.003
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, 327–350. https://doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0
Friedel, C., Irani, T., Rudd, R., Gallo, M., Eckhardt, E., & Ricketts, J. (2008). Overtly teaching critical thinking and inquiry-based learning: A comparison of two undergraduate biotechnology classes. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(1), 72–84. https://doi:10.5032/jae.2008.01072 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2008.01072
Green, L. W. (2001). From research to "best practices" in other settings and populations. American Journal of Health Behavior, 25(3), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.25.3.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.25.3.2
Kaderavek, J. N., & Justice, L. M. (2010). Fidelity: An essential component of evidence-based practice in speech-language pathology. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 19(4), 369–379. https://doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0097) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0097)
Kezar, A., & Elrod, S. (2012). Facilitating interdisciplinary learning: lessons from project kaleidoscope. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2012.635999 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2012.635999
Lakin, J., & Shannon, D. (2015). The role of treatment acceptability, effectiveness, and understanding treatment fidelity: Predicting implementation variation in a middle school science program. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 47, 28–37. https://doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.06.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.06.002
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Lundy, L. K., Irani, T. A., Ricketts, J. C., Eubanks, E. E., Rudd, R.D., GalloMeagher, M., et al. (2002). A mixed-methods study of undergraduate dispositions toward thinking critically about biotechnology [Paper presentation]. National Agricultural Education Research Conference, Las Vegas, NV, United States.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Moncher, F. J., & Prinz, R. J. (1991). Treatment fidelity in outcome studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 11(3), 247–266. https://doi:10.1016/0272-7358(91)90103-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(91)90103-2
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. 2012. Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf
Schulte, A. C., Easton, J. E., & Parker, J. (2009). Advances in treatment integrity research: multidisciplinary perspectives on the conceptualization, measurement, and enhancement of treatment integrity. School Psychology Review, 38(4), 460–475.
Skelton, P., Blackburn, J. J., Stair, K. S., Levy, N., & Dormody, T. J. (2018). Agriscience education through inquiry-based learning: Investigating factors that influence the science competence of middle school students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(1), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.01223 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.01223
Stein, M., Berends, M., Fuchs, D., McMaster, K., Saenz, Yen, L. & Compton, D. L. (2008). Scaling up an early reading program: Relationships among teacher support, fidelity of implementation, and student performance across different sites and years. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30 (4), 368–388. https://doi:10.3102/0162373708322738 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373708322738
Swanson, E., Wanzek, J., Haring, C, Ciullo, S., & McCulley, L. (2011). Intervention fidelity in special and general education research journals. The Journal of Special Education, 45(1), 1–11. https://doi:10.1177/0022466911419516 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466911419516
Thoron, A., & Burleson, S. (2014). Students’ perceptions of agriscience when taught through inquiry-based instruction. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(1), 66–75. https://doi:10.5032/jae.2014.01066 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2014.01066
Vartuli, S., & Rohs, J. (2009) Assurance of outcome evaluation: Curriculum fidelity. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 23(4), 502–512. https://doi:10.1080/02568540909594677 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540909594677
Witt, C., & Ulmer, J. (2010). The impact of inquiry-based learning on the academic achievement of middle school students [Paper presentation]. Western American Association of Agriculture Educators Research Conference, Great Falls, MT, United States.
Yeaton, W. M., & Sechrest, L. (1981). Critical dimensions in the choice and maintenance of successful treatments: Strength, integrity, and effectiveness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49(2), 156–167. https://doi:10.1037/0022-006X.49.2.156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006X.49.2.156
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi:10.1002/tea.10008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
