Team members rated TIPS professional development positively on efficiency, fidelity implementation, student outcomes, and worth of time invested¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·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¶
Related Claims¶
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.