Staff views of the interventions were more positive in schools with experienced TAs, senior staff support, and a dedicated delivery space.¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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.
q2 i? Staff reported the interventions improved literacy, reading ability, and confidence, and their views were more positive where delivery was by experienced TAs, supported by senior staff, and allocated a dedicated space. → Sibieta 2016
Evidence¶
Sibieta 2016¶
Luke Sibieta. (2016). REACH: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581275
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Key conclusion from the mixed-method process evaluation (TA survey plus interviews with staff from six case-study schools). The report states "Staff views were more positive in schools where the interventions were delivered by experienced teaching assistants, supported by senior staff, and allocated a dedicated space for delivery." No effect size is printed.
"Staff views were more positive in schools where the interventions were delivered by experienced teaching assistants, supported by senior staff, and allocated a dedicated space for delivery."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Nearly a quarter of schools failed to deliver the intervention, and successful implementation required senior-leader support, dedicated space, staff time and a timetabled slot — related
- Four implementation themes emerged from UK process evaluations: intervention format, policy consistency, staff buy-in, and perceived effectiveness — related
- Interviewees identified leadership prioritization, staff buy-in, and investments in staffing, training, partnerships, and funding as facilitators of trauma-engaged implementation — related
- Many teaching assistants did not feel confident delivering the intervention after the initial five days of training without ongoing support, and the language comprehension component was hardest to deliver. — 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.