|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|363561||620710||2015||18 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود رایگان|
In this study, we analyzed extant data to evaluate the variability and magnitude of students' behavior change outcomes (academic, social, and behavioral) produced by consultants through problem-solving consultation with teachers. Research questions were twofold: (a) Do consultants produce consistent and sizeable positive student outcomes across their cases as measured through direct and frequent assessment? and (b) What proportion of variability in student outcomes is attributable to consultants? Analyses of extant data collected from problem-solving consultation outcome studies that used single-case, time-series AB designs with multiple participants were analyzed. Four such studies ultimately met the inclusion criteria for the extant data, comprising 124 consultants who worked with 302 school teachers regarding 453 individual students. Consultants constituted the independent variable, while the primary dependent variable was a descriptive effect size based on student behavior change as measured by (a) curriculum-based measures, (b) permanent products, or (c) direct observations. Primary analyses involved visual and statistical evaluation of effect size magnitude and variability observed within and between consultants and studies. Given the nested nature of the data, multilevel analyses were used to assess consultant effects on student outcomes. Results suggest that consultants consistently produced positive effect sizes on average across their cases, but outcomes varied between consultants. Findings also indicated that consultants, teachers, and the corresponding studies accounted for a significant proportion of variability in student outcomes. This investigation advances the use of multilevel and integrative data analyses to evaluate consultation outcomes and extends research on problem-solving consultation, consultant effects, and meta-analysis of case study AB designs. Practical implications for evaluating consultation service delivery in school settings are also discussed.
Journal: Journal of School Psychology - Volume 53, Issue 2, April 2015, Pages 161–178