Claims

Disadvantaged (EYPP-eligible) children in the integrated intervention gained more in numeracy and spatial skills than disadvantaged controls

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2–r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-26 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · 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 i2 For EYPP-eligible children, numeracy gains were larger in the intervention group (T1 = 25.04; T2 = 32.07) than in the control group (T1 = 14.86; T2 = 18.48; Hedge's g = 0.64). → Scerif 2025 q3 i2 EYPP-eligible children in the intervention arm also improved more in spatial skills (BAS-PC; Hedge's g = 0.65) than disadvantaged controls. → Scerif 2025 (2)

Evidence

Scerif 2025

Scerif, G., Sučević, J., Andrews, H., Blakey, E., Gattas, S. U., Godfrey, A., et al. (2025). Enhancing children's numeracy and executive functions via their explicit integration. npj Science of Learning 10, 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00302-9

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Intervention * EYPP interaction from the cluster RCT's intention-to-treat analysis; the table reports Hedge's g = 0.64 for this interaction, and the text notes the disadvantaged-versus-non-disadvantaged gap was reduced in the intervention group.

"For children with EYPP eligibility, changes in EYTN scores were larger in the Intervention group (T1 = 25.04; T2 = 32.07) than in the Control group (T1 = 14.86, T2 = 18.48, p = 0.001)."

Scerif 2025 (2)

Scerif, G., Sučević, J., Andrews, H., Blakey, E., Gattas, S. U., Godfrey, A., et al. (2025). Enhancing children's numeracy and executive functions via their explicit integration. npj Science of Learning 10, 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00302-9

q3 · i2 · causal · r3

BAS-PC spatial skills interaction in the same trial; the table reports Hedge's g = 0.65 for the Intervention * EYPP interaction. Disadvantaged children improved more in the intervention group (T1 = 48.49; T2 = 53.98) than controls (T1 = 42.31; T2 = 44.30).

"Children with EYPP eligibility had poorer spatial skills than children without EYPP eligibility in the Control group,p < 0.001, but not in the intervention group,p = 0.366."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.