Chess lessons were less effective when the class teacher did not actively take part in the intervention¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Classes were perceived as less effective when the class teacher was absent, passive, or present only at the beginning and end of lessons. → Jerrim et al. 2016

Evidence¶

Jerrim et al. 2016¶

John Jerrim, Lindsey Macmillan, John Micklewright, Mary Sawtell and Meg Wiggins. (2016). Chess in Schools: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/library/chess-in-schools-protocol/

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Process evaluation finding from observations, teacher survey and stakeholder interviews. The level of class teacher engagement was lower than expected and was a primary departure from intended delivery; increasing tutor/class teacher liaison was a key improvement area.

"For successful implementation, class teachers need to work closely with the tutor and actively contribute to the intervention. It was felt that classes were less effective if the teacher did not actively take part, or was present only at the beginning and end of the class."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Successful implementation of classroom chess lessons required tutors with strong class management and teaching skills — related
• Pupils and school staff held generally positive views of the chess intervention despite the null impact result — related
• The Chess in Primary Schools programme showed no evidence of a positive impact on Key Stage 2 mathematics attainment one year after the intervention ended — related
• School engagement with the interventions was low, and the passive or active nature of support was not the key determinant of engagement — related