Intervention studies report larger skill effects than cross-sectional studies, but study design does not moderate knowledge, beliefs, or student-behavior effects¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Effect sizes on skills differed between intervention studies (g = 0.56) and cross-sectional studies (g = 0.36), with interventions larger; design did not moderate the other three outcome categories, contrary to the authors' hypothesis. → Johanna L. Donath 2023

Evidence¶

Johanna L. Donath 2023¶

Johanna L. Donath, Timo Lüke, Elisabeth Graf, Ulrich S. Tran, Thomas Götz. (2023). Does Professional Development Effectively Support the Implementation of Inclusive Education? A Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09752-2

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Moderator analysis of study design across the meta-analysis. "the former reporting signifi cantly larger effect sizes (g = 0.56 [0.46; 0.66]) than the latter (g = 0.36 [0.27; 0.46])" for skills only; knowledge, beliefs, and student behavior were not moderated by design.

"Effect sizes reporting effects on skills differed between intervention studies and cross-sectional studies, with the former reporting signifi cantly larger effect sizes (g = 0.56 [0.46; 0.66]) than the latter (g = 0.36 [0.27; 0.46])"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Intervention studies reported larger effect sizes than cross-sectional studies, and studies including more teaching assistants reported larger effects — related
• Children's theory of mind shows a significant positive cross-sectional association with academic achievement (r = 0.32) — related
• Publication bias is present to a varying degree, with published studies reporting larger belief and student-behavior effects than unpublished studies — related