The evaluation found no differential impact of PLC for pupils eligible for free school meals or with low prior attainment¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.
q2 i? Separate analyses for FSM-eligible pupils and pupils with low KS2 attainment found no evidence of differential impact; reduced sample size lowered experimental power in these models. → Cinzia Rienzo 2016
Evidence¶
Cinzia Rienzo 2016¶
Cinzia Rienzo, Heather Rolfe and David Wilkinson. (2016). Powerful Learning Conversations: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581274
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Subgroup intention-to-treat analyses of the pilot RCT for pupils eligible for free school meals and those with KS2 points below the bottom third percentile. The report notes the reduced sample size reduces experimental power in these models; no effect size is printed for the subgroups.
"The evaluation did not provide evidence of a differential impact on pupils eligible for free school meals or pupils with a low prior attainment."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Socioeconomic Status — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group
Related Claims¶
- RLC showed no differential impact for pupils eligible for free school meals — related
- The intervention showed no evidence of differentially benefiting pupils eligible for free school meals in any of the schools — related
- Passive dissemination showed no evidence of improving literacy attainment for the subgroup of pupils who have ever been eligible for free school meals — 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
- FSM-eligible pupils made around five additional months' progress under TDTS (effect size +0.38), though this finding has lower security — related
- EEF interventions showed a small overall narrowing of the literacy attainment gap in favour of FSM pupils, dependent on Key Stage — related
- Among FSM-eligible pupils, music workshops showed no impact on attainment relative to the drama control — related
- The trial found a statistically significant negative literacy impact for FSM-eligible pupils, treated with caution — related
- For FSM-eligible pupils there was no evidence of positive impact on attainment or self-reported character attributes — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.