The LRS intervention showed no evidence of improving Key Stage 2 maths and reading results for the one-year cohort¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr3·q4·i0negligible
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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.
q4 i0 For cohort A (one year of LRS use), the effect on KS2 maths and reading was 0.00 with confidence intervals spanning zero. → Wiggins et al. 2017
Evidence¶
Wiggins et al. 2017¶
Meg Wiggins, Mary Sawtell and Dr John Jerrim. (2017). Learner Response System: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581136
q4 · i0 · causal · r3
Cluster randomised controlled trial with school-level randomisation; Table 1 reports maths (cohort A) effect size 0.00 (-0.13 to 0.14), p 0.96, and reading (cohort A) 0.00 (-0.12 to 0.13), p 0.96, with 2,837 and 2,829 pupils. The report states "no evidence that the LRS improved Key Stage 2 results".
"The project found no evidence that the LRS improved Key Stage 2 results in maths and reading for either cohort."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The two-year LRS cohort showed no evidence of benefit, with point estimates slightly negative for maths — related
- The LRS showed no evidence of improving average scores for boys, girls, or pupils ever eligible for free school meals — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.