As intervention developers and researchers, writers put forth great effort to design lessons that help struggling students, including those with learning disabilities (LD), develop important concepts and skills in all academic areas. As part of the development process, tutors or classroom interventionists, for example, implement the lessons, and developers make changes to the lessons based on observations and feedback. Certified teachers implement the lessons and they, along with their students, provide feedback about the lessons. The goal of most research of this type is to identify the efficacy of the lessons “as written.” Fidelity of implementation data serve as an indicator for the degree to which lessons are conducted as intended. The concept of fidelity includes examination of lessons conducted in both the treatment and control conditions. Thus, researchers have responsibilities regarding the reporting of fidelity in manuscripts submitted for publication consideration to journals such as the Learning Disability Quarterly (LDQ). Because of the importance of fidelity in learning disabilities research, we were pleased that our colleagues Lindy Crawford and Keith Smolkowski, two noted researchers who have published several of their manuscripts in this journal, took the lead in serving as guest editors for this special series. Lindy and Keith assembled an impressive team of researchers to contribute to this special series, Implementation Science for Research in Learning Disabilities. Their explanation of the special series’ topic, co-authored with John R. Seeley and Jonathan Rochelle, provides context for articles to follow. Sanetti and Luh co-authored the next paper in the series, Fidelity of Implementation in the Field of Learning Disabilities. The authors noted that, despite developer’s best efforts, interventions are often adopted slowly and delivered with poor fidelity resulting in disappointing outcomes for students. In examining these issues, the authors address four topics. First, they overview implementation science and implementation theories, models, and frameworks. Second, Sanetti and Luh present the relevance of implementation science and fidelity as both the systemslevel and individual level of implementation in the context of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and for students with LD. Next, the authors reviewed unique legal aspects related to service implementation for students with LD and how state-level mandates and available science relate to one another, not always positively. Fourth, the authors provide readers with valuable resources and recommendations. Crawford, Freeman, Huscroft-D’Angelo, Quebec Fuentes, and Higgins finalize this section of the special series with their manuscript, Implementation Fidelity and the Design of a Fractions Intervention. In this paper, the authors argued that interventions are implemented with greater fidelity when their core intent is made explicit. They present four steps undertaken in the development of a Tier 2 fraction-based mathematics intervention designed to improve the conceptual understanding of students with mathematics LD or difficulties Although the results of the pilot study demonstrated no significant effect for the component of technology, these researchers did note significant pre–post differences were found in the performance of all groups on their conceptual understanding of fractions as numbers. As is our custom, we provide articles of interest that do not focus on the special issue topic. The next article, The Mathematical Performance of At-Risk First Graders as a Function of Limited English Proficiency Status is authored by Martin and L. S. Fuchs. In their paper, the authors explored interactions between limited English proficiency (LEP) status and computation and word-problem-solving performance. Their results suggested that language proficiency is important when examining the development of computation and word-problem-solving skill. The authors conclude with important implications for future research. In the last paper in this issue, Teaching Academic Vocabulary to Sixth-Grade Students With Disabilities, O’Connor, Beach, Sanchez, Kim, Knight-Teague, Orozco, and Jones focus on adolescents with disabilities who have considerable difficulty with academic content in middle school. Not surprisingly, their teachers have difficulty teaching their students to understand and use academic language. O’Connor et al. developed instructional routines and units to introduce four words per week to the participants. Results favored the treatment condition, although neartransfer effects to vocabulary usage were less successful. We are deeply appreciative to Lindy and Keith for their outstanding leadership in pulling this special series together. Two additional articles on the topic of fidelity will appear in the next issue. We also appreciate all of the authors for agreeing to share their work with LDQ readers.

中文翻译：

---

《学习障碍》季刊第42卷第4期简介

作为干预开发人员和研究人员，作家们付出了巨大的努力来设计课程，以帮助陷入困境的学生，包括有学习障碍的学生，在所有学术领域发展重要的概念和技能。作为开发过程的一部分，例如，辅导员或课堂干预人员实施课程，而开发人员则根据观察和反馈对课程进行更改。经过认证的老师负责实施课程，他们与学生一起提供有关课程的反馈。大多数此类研究的目的是确定“书面”课程的有效性。实施数据的保真度可作为按计划进行课程的程度的指标。忠实的概念包括检查在治疗和控制条件下进行的课程。因此，研究人员有责任报告手稿的保真度，这些手稿已提交给诸如学习障碍季刊（LDQ）之类的期刊以供发表。由于保真度在学习障碍研究中的重要性，令我们感到高兴的是，两位著名研究人员在本刊上发表了几篇手稿的同事Lindy Crawford和Keith Smolkowski率先担任该特别系列的客座编辑。Lindy和Keith组成了一个令人印象深刻的研究团队，为这个特殊的系列《学习障碍研究的实施科学》做出了贡献。他们与John R. Seeley和Jonathan Rochelle合着的对特别系列主题的解释为后续文章提供了背景。Sanetti和Luh合着了该系列的下一篇论文，学习障碍领域的执行保真度。作者指出，尽管开发人员尽了最大的努力，但干预措施通常采用缓慢，且保真度差，导致学生的学习成绩令人失望。在研究这些问题时，作者讨论了四个主题。首先，他们概述了实施科学以及实施理论，模型和框架。其次，Sanetti和Luh在多层支持系统的背景下以及针对LD的学生，介绍了实施科学和保真度在系统级别和个人实施级别的相关性。接下来，作者回顾了与LD学生实施服务有关的独特法律方面，以及州级授权和现有科学之间如何相互联系，但并不总是积极联系。第四，作者为读者提供了宝贵的资源和建议。Crawford，Freeman，Huscroft-D'Angelo，Quebec Fuentes和Higgins的手稿，实施保真度和分数干预设计最终确定了这一特别系列的这一部分。在本文中，作者认为，当明确了干预的核心意图时，干预措施的保真度就会更高。他们介绍了开发基于分数的2阶数学干预措施的四个步骤，旨在提高对数学LD或困难学生的概念理解，尽管该试点研究的结果表明对技术的组成部分没有显着影响，这些研究人员确实注意到，在对分数作为数字的概念理解上，所有组的表现都存在明显的前后差异。按照我们的习惯，我们提供的关注文章不关注特殊问题。下一篇文章，由Martin和LS Fuchs撰写的《风险一年级生的数学表现与有限英语水平状态的函数》。在他们的论文中，作者探索了有限英语水平（LEP）状态与计算和单词问题解决性能之间的相互作用。他们的结果表明，在检查计算和单词问题解决技能的发展时，语言熟练程度很重要。作者的结论对未来的研究具有重要意义。在本期的最后一篇论文中，O'Connor，Beach，Sanchez，Kim，Knight-Teague，Orozco和Jones教授向六年级的残疾学生教授学术词汇，重点关注的是那些在中学阶段学业相当困难的残疾青少年。毫不奇怪，他们的老师很难教他们的学生理解和使用学术语言。O'Connor等。开发了教学程序和单元，每周向参与者介绍四个单词。结果对治疗条件有利，尽管对词汇使用的近转移效应不太成功。我们对Lindy和Keith在将这个特别系列放在一起方面的出色领导深表感谢。下期将发表有关保真主题的另外两篇文章。