Measuring the Results of Performance Improvement Interventions

In this study, a web‐based questionnaire was used to measure attitudes of members of a professional performance improvement organization relative to adoption and implementation of Level 4 or results‐oriented evaluation. Participants were 274 members of the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI). It was expected that frequency of Level 4 evaluation use could be explained by innovation diffusion or change variables. Findings suggest that the adoption of effective performance improvement measurement systems and processes at the organizational level is relatively low compared to other types of evaluation. This level of adoption is impacted by a complex array of factors. Stakeholder participation in the adaptation of evaluation systems to increase their compatibility with current practices, and experimentation with this type of evaluation on a limited or trial basis may increase the rate of adoption. Management support of the development and adaptation of a results‐oriented evaluation system is seen as providing the opportunity for the change process to move forward. Implications for diffusion of this type of evaluation within organizations will be discussed within the context of a HPT Change framework.     

Reading Recovery and Evidence‐based Practice: A response to Reynolds and Wheldall (2007)

Reynolds and Wheldall reviewed research relating to Reading Recovery (RR) and concluded that “RR has provided an excellent model in demonstrating how to plan, promote, and implement an intervention across an educational system and how to design a professional development programme” (2007 Reynolds, M. and Wheldall, K. 2007. Reading Recovery 20 years down the track: Looking forward, looking back. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54: 199–223. [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar], p. 218). They balanced this praise with concerns about the research base for RR, its effectiveness for the lowest‐performing first‐grade students, long‐term change in literacy achievement for RR students and RR’s cost‐effectiveness. This response aims to address these concerns by discussing four central issues of evidence‐based practice from their review: evidence of effectiveness; sustained gains; programme evaluation data from a response to intervention perspective; and cost‐effectiveness versus cost‐benefit.