Table 5.
Summary of Results by Outcome for Pre-Post Test Measures using Most Proximal Assessment with Effect Sizes (where reported).
| Outcome measures › | Teacher measures |
Pupil measures |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study (first author & date) | Teacher knowledge (n = 17) | Teacher behavior (n = 6) | Pupil behavior (n = 16) | |||
| Aguiar (2014) | + | η2 = 0.57 (p < .001) | ||||
| Anto (2014) | + | nr | ||||
| Barbaresi (1998) | + | nr | ||||
| Barnett (2010, 2012) | + | nr | = | nr | ||
| Bloomquist (1991) | - | nr | ||||
| Both (2016) | + | d = 1.51 | ||||
| Corkum (2019) | + | η2 = 0.06 (p = .01) | ||||
| Froelich (2012) | + | F(1,41) = 4.98 (p < .031) | ||||
| Gormley (2015) | * | IRD = 0.13–0.55 | ||||
| Kołakowski (2009) | + | nr | ||||
| Lasisi (2017) | + | d = 0.9 | ||||
| Latouche (2019) | + | d = 2.38 | ||||
| Lauth-Lebens (2016) | + | d = 1.77 | ||||
| Lessing (2015) | + | nr | ||||
| Miranda (2002) | = | nr | ~ | nr | ||
| Mohammed (2018) | + | nr | ||||
| Nadeau (2012) | + | η2 = 0.48 (p = .006) | ||||
| Obaidat (2014) | + | η2 = 0.78 | ||||
| Owens (2017) | + | d = 0.33–1.12 | ||||
| Park (2017) | + | F = 7.16 (p = .010) | + | F = 4.29 (p = .043) | + | F = 4.34 (p = .041) |
| Procaccini (2014) | + | nr | ||||
| Rossbach (2005) | + | nr | ~ | nr | ||
| Sarraf (2011) | = | F(1,61) = 0.14 (p = .71) | ||||
| Shaban (2015) | + | F(3, 62) = 62.98 (p = .001) | ||||
| Shehata (2016) | + | nr | + | nr | ||
| Syed (2010) | + | nr | ||||
| Tahiroğlu (2004) | + | nr | ||||
| Veenman (2017, 2019) | ± | r = –0.074 (p < .01); r = 0.133 (p = .639) | ||||
| Zentall (2007) | + | χ2(1, n = 11) = 4.28; (p = .039); χ2(1, n = 11) = 4.06, p = .041; χ2(1, n = 11) = 3.59, p = 0.049 | ~ | nr | ||
Note. + significant improvement – significant deterioration = no significant change ± outcome measures reported conflicting results.
~ incomplete data reported.
IRD = individual rate difference.