The Quest programme showed no statistically significant effect on Year 7 reading comprehension, with a small negative point estimate (Hedges g = -0.04)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Pupils who received Quest did not significantly differ from comparison pupils on reading comprehension (NGRT), with a small negative effect size of -0.04 (95% CI -0.14, 0.07; p = 0.48). → Quest: Evaluation report and Executive summary 2015

Evidence¶

Quest: Evaluation report and Executive summary 2015¶

Quest: Evaluation report and Executive summary. (2015). Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581287

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Cluster-randomised efficacy trial with regression and robust standard errors; 2,083 pupils analysed. Table 3.9 reports Hedges g = -0.04 (95% CI -0.14, 0.07), p = 0.48, adjusted post-test means of -0.06 (intervention) vs -0.03 (control).

"A small negative effect size was found but was not statistically significant. In addition, none of the interaction terms were significant."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Chatterbooks showed no statistically significant effect on reading ability among Year 7 pupils below Level 4, with a slightly negative point estimate — related
• The VEFP showed no statistically significant effect on the NGRT secondary outcomes of sentence completion or passage comprehension — related
• For pupils entitled to free school meals, Butterfly Phonics showed no statistically significant effects on any outcome (NGRT g = 0.16, SWRT g = 0.42, PhAB g = 0.18) — related
• Chatterbooks Plus showed no statistically significant effect on reading ability, with an effect size indistinguishable from zero — related
• The Vocabulary Enrichment Full Programme showed no statistically significant impact on Year 7 pupils' reading ability in a pupil-randomised controlled trial — 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
• Secondary outcomes (sentence completion and passage comprehension subscales) showed no significant effects for either intervention — related
• The VEFP showed no statistically significant impact on reading for pupils eligible for free school meals — related
• The FSM subgroup effect of Rhythm for Reading (effect size 0.11) was not statistically significant — related
• Neither NGRT secondary outcome (sentence completion or passage comprehension) showed a statistically significant effect of Rhythm for Reading — related
• Passport to Literacy showed no significant effects on word reading, decoding, or oral reading fluency outcomes — related