TDTS teachers reported more positive views of pupils' ability and engagement, and judged the approach beneficial across the ability range including pupils with special educational needs¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? TDTS teachers were much more likely than control teachers to agree with positive statements about their pupils' ability, confidence and motivation in science, especially enjoyment and engagement. → Pam Hanley 2015
q2 i? TDTS participants were more inclined than control teachers to say their approach benefited pupils with special educational needs (49% vs 24%) and low ability pupils (55% vs 14%). → Pam Hanley 2015
Evidence¶
Pam Hanley 2015¶
Pam Hanley, Robert Slavin, Louise Elliott. (2015). Thinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and Executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN54969918
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Teacher survey item asking intervention and control teachers which groups the approach benefited; percentages as printed. Around three-quarters of TDTS teachers agreed strongly they had used the strategies, found the training inspiring, and that it had benefited their pupils.
"TDTS participants were more inclined to mention those with special educational needs (49% vs 24%). The intervention appeared to be judged effective across the ability range, with 55% (vs 14% control) saying it was beneficial for low ability pupils, 46% (vs 33% control) for middle ability, and 52% (vs 24% control) for high ability."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- TDTS showed slightly larger effects for pupils with low prior attainment (+0.30) than for those above the median (+0.22), with all pupils benefiting — related
- TDTS pupils reported more positive attitudes towards science, science lessons and practical work than comparison pupils — related
- TDTS teachers reported using more practical work, discussion and thinking time, but little difference in confidence and no more literacy–numeracy linking — related
- TDTS pupils reported having more discussions and doing less writing in science lessons, in line with the TDTS model — related
- FSM-eligible pupils made around five additional months' progress under TDTS (effect size +0.38), though this finding has lower security — 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.