No significant differences between control and either intervention group on secondary outcomes (reading and general ability)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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? On the Salford Sentence Reading Test and Non-Reading Intelligence Tests 1-3, post-test gains were significant overall but did not differ between the control group and either intervention group. → National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) 2014
Evidence¶
National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) 2014¶
National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), evaluation team led by Simon Rutt. (2014). Catch Up® Numeracy: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://www.educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evaluation
q3 · i? · causal · r2
The ITT analysis was replicated on secondary outcomes (reading ability and general ability). While "significant increases were found in the post-test scores", no difference separated control from either intervention group; no effect sizes are printed.
"Secondary outcomes analysed included pre and post-test data from the Salford Sentence Reading Test and the Non-Reading Intelligence Tests 1-3. Data was analysed in the same way as that used for the main ITT analysis and while significant increases were found in the post-test scores there was no significant difference between pupils in the control group and either of the two intervention groups."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Reading and Language — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Secondary outcomes (sentence completion and passage comprehension subscales) showed no significant effects for either intervention — related
- The Vocabulary Enrichment Full Programme showed no statistically significant impact on Year 7 pupils' reading ability in a pupil-randomised controlled trial — related
- The equivalent-time one-to-one group outperformed control (+0.27) with no significant difference from the Catch Up group, suggesting gains came from one-to-one teaching rather than Catch Up Numeracy itself — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.