The intervention showed no evidence of differentially benefiting pupils eligible for free school meals, despite a marginal group-by-FSM interaction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A pre-specified subgroup analysis found a statistically significant interaction between allocated group and FSM status (p=0.08) but no evidence of a significant intervention effect in either FSM or non-FSM pupils. → Torgerson 2014

Evidence¶

Torgerson 2014¶

Torgerson, D., Torgerson, C., Mitchell, N., Buckley, H., Ainsworth, H., Heaps, C., & Jefferson, L. (2014). Grammar for Writing: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://www.educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evaluation

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Pre-specified subgroup analysis adding an interaction term to the primary cluster-level analysis, with significance assessed at the 10% level. Marginal mean extended writing scores were higher for non-FSM pupils; effect sizes were 0.02 for FSM-eligible and 0.16 for non-FSM pupils, neither significant.

"Despite there being no evidence of an intervention effect, there was some evidence of a statistically significant interaction between allocated group and FSM status (p=0.08), suggesting the intervention had a different effect on FSM and non -FSM pupils."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Socioeconomic Status — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group

Related Claims¶

• Sub-group analysis found no significant interactions with pupil gender or free school meal eligibility — reports the opposite
• The intervention showed no evidence of differentially benefiting pupils eligible for free school meals in any of the schools — related
• The intervention appeared more effective for FSM pupils, but the FSM interaction was not statistically significant — reports the opposite
• Neither intervention had a significant impact on the FSM pupil sub-group, though the literacy intervention showed a significant positive interaction with FSM status — related
• Small-group Grammar for Writing shows a statistically significant but small positive effect on extended writing versus control (effect size 0.24) — related
• Small-group delivery of Grammar for Writing outperforms whole-class delivery on extended writing (effect size 0.21) — related