ArticleImplementation science communications2025
Unpacking the implementation climate in general education settings in public schools: a sequential-explanatory mixed-methods study.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAutism has significantly increased in the United States with 1 in 31 children affected and increasingly included in general education settings as mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. While several evidence-based practices (EBPs) effectively support autistic students, organizational-level factors hinder successful implementation in school settings. Implementation climate-implementers' collective perceptions that their organization prioritizes, rewards, and supports EBP implementation-strongly predicts EBP use. However, little is known about implementation climate within general education settings in public schools.
methodsA sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach was applied. Participants included 361 general education teachers (n = 161), special education teachers (n = 138), and paraeducators (n = 62) across 60 elementary schools. All participants served at least one autistic student included in a general education classroom, with the total number of autistic students served ranging from 1 to 30 (M = 3.75). Participants completed the School Implementation Climate Scale (SICS) and aggregate mean scores for each subscale (i.e., focus on EBP, education support, recognition for EBPs, rewards for EBPs, use of data to support EBPs, existing support to deliver EBPs, integration of EBPs) were calculated. To better understand EBP use, participants were randomly selected (n = 82: 24 general education teachers, 49 special education teachers, 9 paraeducators) to complete 30-40 min semi-structured interviews, with equal distributions of non, low, and high EBP users. Data were collected between 2021-2024.
resultsQuantitative analysis via aggregate mean scores on the SICS (Total M = 1.8) subscales revealed that educators rated implementation constructs relatively low. Qualitative findings provide additional insights into implementation challenges such as limited educational and professional development opportunities, insufficient EBP preparation time, lack of resources for autistic children, and minimal recognition and reward for EBP implementation.
conclusionsFindings reveal a suboptimal implementation climate within general education settings in public schools for supporting autistic students. These insights suggest the need to improve the implementation climate to facilitate successful EBP implementation. Recommendations and key areas for future research are discussed. Limitations, including the need to examine the impact of outer contextual factors are described.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.