Meeting foundations were significantly higher for TIPS-trained teams at follow-up, though both groups began with relatively high foundation scores¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q4 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i2 Three months after TIPS professional development, Meeting Foundation scores were statistically significantly higher for the Immediate Group than the Waitlist Group. → Horner 2018 q4 i? The main effect for group on meeting foundations was significant, but the Group × Observation interaction was not. → Horner 2018

Evidence¶

Horner 2018¶

Horner, R. H., Newton, J. S., Todd, A. W., Algozzine, B., Algozzine, K., Cusumano, D., & Preston, A. (2018). A Randomized Waitlist Controlled Analysis of Team-Initiated Problem Solving Professional Development and Use. Behavioral Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742917745638

q4 · i2 · causal · r2

Repeated-measures ANOVA on DORA-II Meeting Foundations scores across four observations of 38 teams. The follow-up contrast favored trained teams; the article reports "ES = .68" for that comparison.

"higher at the O3 follow-up observation for the IM (M = 0.87) than for the WL (M = 0.74) teams (t O3 = 2.42, df = 35, p = .02, ES = .68)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• TIPS-trained teams more often documented reductions in office discipline referrals at follow-up, with no group difference in the final year — related
• TIPS-trained teams more often documented reductions in out-of-school suspensions at follow-up — related
• TIPS professional development produces immediate and continuing improvements in school teams' overall problem-solving practices — related
• Team members rated TIPS professional development positively on efficiency, fidelity implementation, student outcomes, and worth of time invested — related