P4C gains at Key Stage 2 were greater for FSM-eligible pupils in all subjects¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 FSM-eligible pupils receiving P4C showed larger KS2 gains than comparison FSM pupils: +0.20 in maths, +0.29 in reading, and +0.17 in writing. → Gorard et al. 2015

Evidence¶

Gorard et al. 2015¶

Stephen Gorard, Nadia Siddiqui and Beng Huat See. (2015). Philosophy for Children: Evaluation report and Executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581147

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Pre-specified subgroup analysis of the same school-level randomised trial, restricted to pupils eligible for free school meals. The report's results table prints FSM effect sizes of +0.20 (maths, +3 months), +0.29 (reading, +4 months) and +0.17 (writing, +2 months) for P4C versus comparison FSM pupils.

"It is also important to note that the gains in KS2 were greater in all subjects for students eligible for free school meals (FSM)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A year of weekly P4C improved Key Stage 2 progress in reading and maths relative to business-as-usual — related
• P4C showed no evidence of improvement at Key Stage 2 for writing — reports the opposite
• EEF interventions showed a small overall narrowing of the literacy attainment gap in favour of FSM pupils, dependent on Key Stage — related
• Literacy benefits for FSM pupils were greatest in Key Stage 1 (ES 0.09) and Key Stage 3 (ES 0.08) and smallest in Key Stages 2 and 4 — 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
• The absenteeism reduction appeared larger in the Key Stage 4 cohort than in Key Stage 3 — related