Challenge the Gap showed no evidence of increased average attainment for primary or secondary pupils overall¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The project found no evidence that CtG increased average attainment for either primary or secondary school pupils overall. → West 2017

Evidence¶

West 2017¶

West, M., Ainscow, M., Wigelsworth, M., & Troncoso, P. (2017). Challenge the Gap: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581102

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Executive summary key conclusion reporting the null overall result of the matched-controlled efficacy trial of 104 schools (21,041 pupils). Table 1 shows effect sizes of 0.00 for Key Stage 2 and -0.01 for Key Stage 4, with p values of 0.993 and 0.926 respectively.

"The project found no evidence that Challenge the Gap (CtG) increased average attainment for either primary or secondary school pupils, overall."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• FSM-eligible pupils in CtG primary schools made two months' additional progress while FSM pupils in secondary schools made two months' less progress — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Primary school findings have low to moderate security while secondary school findings have low security — related
• EEF-funded interventions improved FSM pupils' literacy outcomes with a pooled effect size of 0.06, equivalent to about one month's progress — related
• Across 82 EEF RCT evaluations, overall meta-analysis weighted mean effect sizes were small: +0.04 SD for primary ITT, +0.01 SD for secondary ITT, and +0.03 SD for FSM subsample attainment outcomes — related
• Mind the Gap showed no statistically significant effect on the primary outcome of combined reading and numeracy attainment in Year 4 pupils — related
• EEF interventions showed a small overall narrowing of the literacy attainment gap in favour of FSM pupils, dependent on Key Stage — related
• The TextNow programme showed a differential effect by free school meal eligibility: a small non-significant positive effect for FSM-eligible pupils and a significant negative effect for non-FSM pupils — related
• The trial found a statistically significant negative literacy impact for FSM-eligible pupils, treated with caution — related