Claims

Team members rated TIPS professional development positively on efficiency, fidelity implementation, student outcomes, and worth of time invested

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Respondents agreed TIPS helped them conduct efficient and effective meetings, improved implementation fidelity, improved student outcomes, and was worth the time and energy. → 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

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Seven-item online social validity survey on a 4-point Likert-type scale administered to team members in both groups after final observations; the article reports the printed means and no significant state difference.

"respondents agreed that TIPS (a) helped them conduct efficient and effective meetings (n = 43, M = 3.77), (b) improved implementation of interventions with fidelity (n = 42, M = 3.67), (c) improved student outcomes (n = 43, M = 3.70)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.