A meta-analysis of prereferral intervention teams

Student and systemic outcomes

Matthew K. Burns, Todd Symington

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although prereferral intervention teams (PIT) are common in public schools, there is little and conflicting research to support them. The current article conducted an empirical meta-analysis of research on PITs by reviewing 72 articles. Nine of the articles matched the inclusion criteria for the study and 57 effect size (ES) coefficients were computed, which resulted in a mean ES of 1.10. The studies were further broken down by category of dependent variable (DV), and resulted in a mean ES of 1.15 for student outcomes and 0.90 for systemic outcomes. PITs that were implemented by university faculty resulted in a mean ES of 1.32, but field-based PITs resulted in a mean ES of only .54. Studies that used random assignment resulted in higher ES coefficients than those that used nonrandom assignment. Implications for research and cautious suggestions for practice are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)437-447
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of School Psychology
Volume40
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2002

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Students
Research
student
inclusion
university
school

Keywords

  • Meta-analysis
  • Outcomes
  • Prereferral intervention

Cite this

A meta-analysis of prereferral intervention teams : Student and systemic outcomes. / Burns, Matthew K.; Symington, Todd.

In: Journal of School Psychology, Vol. 40, No. 5, 01.09.2002, p. 437-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Burns, Matthew K. ; Symington, Todd. / A meta-analysis of prereferral intervention teams : Student and systemic outcomes. In: Journal of School Psychology. 2002 ; Vol. 40, No. 5. pp. 437-447.
@article{4b933e31b4e24b93b91bd48e7219302f,
title = "A meta-analysis of prereferral intervention teams: Student and systemic outcomes",
abstract = "Although prereferral intervention teams (PIT) are common in public schools, there is little and conflicting research to support them. The current article conducted an empirical meta-analysis of research on PITs by reviewing 72 articles. Nine of the articles matched the inclusion criteria for the study and 57 effect size (ES) coefficients were computed, which resulted in a mean ES of 1.10. The studies were further broken down by category of dependent variable (DV), and resulted in a mean ES of 1.15 for student outcomes and 0.90 for systemic outcomes. PITs that were implemented by university faculty resulted in a mean ES of 1.32, but field-based PITs resulted in a mean ES of only .54. Studies that used random assignment resulted in higher ES coefficients than those that used nonrandom assignment. Implications for research and cautious suggestions for practice are discussed.",
keywords = "Meta-analysis, Outcomes, Prereferral intervention",
author = "Burns, {Matthew K.} and Todd Symington",
year = "2002",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00106-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "437--447",
journal = "Journal of School Psychology",
issn = "0022-4405",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A meta-analysis of prereferral intervention teams

T2 - Student and systemic outcomes

AU - Burns, Matthew K.

AU - Symington, Todd

PY - 2002/9/1

Y1 - 2002/9/1

N2 - Although prereferral intervention teams (PIT) are common in public schools, there is little and conflicting research to support them. The current article conducted an empirical meta-analysis of research on PITs by reviewing 72 articles. Nine of the articles matched the inclusion criteria for the study and 57 effect size (ES) coefficients were computed, which resulted in a mean ES of 1.10. The studies were further broken down by category of dependent variable (DV), and resulted in a mean ES of 1.15 for student outcomes and 0.90 for systemic outcomes. PITs that were implemented by university faculty resulted in a mean ES of 1.32, but field-based PITs resulted in a mean ES of only .54. Studies that used random assignment resulted in higher ES coefficients than those that used nonrandom assignment. Implications for research and cautious suggestions for practice are discussed.

AB - Although prereferral intervention teams (PIT) are common in public schools, there is little and conflicting research to support them. The current article conducted an empirical meta-analysis of research on PITs by reviewing 72 articles. Nine of the articles matched the inclusion criteria for the study and 57 effect size (ES) coefficients were computed, which resulted in a mean ES of 1.10. The studies were further broken down by category of dependent variable (DV), and resulted in a mean ES of 1.15 for student outcomes and 0.90 for systemic outcomes. PITs that were implemented by university faculty resulted in a mean ES of 1.32, but field-based PITs resulted in a mean ES of only .54. Studies that used random assignment resulted in higher ES coefficients than those that used nonrandom assignment. Implications for research and cautious suggestions for practice are discussed.

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Outcomes

KW - Prereferral intervention

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036744983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036744983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00106-1

DO - 10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00106-1

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 437

EP - 447

JO - Journal of School Psychology

JF - Journal of School Psychology

SN - 0022-4405

IS - 5

ER -