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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A small positive (but not significant) effect was found for pupils eligible for free school meals, while a negative and statistically significant effect was detected for pupils not eligible for free school meals. → Maxwell 2014

Evidence¶

Maxwell 2014¶

Maxwell, B., Connolly, P., Demack, S., O'Hare, L., Stevens, A., & Clague, L. (2014). TextNow Transition Programme: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581131

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Subgroup analyses conducted after a significant FSM-by-intervention interaction term in the multilevel models of the trial's primary outcome. The report prints +0.18 (-0.13, +0.48) for FSM pupils and -0.19 (-0.01, -0.36) for non-FSM pupils, described as "a negative effect equivalent to three months' less progress" for non-FSM pupils.

"A small positive (but not significant) effect was found for pupils eligible for free school meals, while a negative (and statistically significant) effect was detected for pupils not eligible for free school meals. It is unclear why this differential effect was found."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Socioeconomic Status — moderator: an instructional effect differs by group

Related Claims¶

• The trial found a statistically significant negative literacy impact for FSM-eligible pupils, treated with caution — 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
• EEF interventions showed a small overall narrowing of the literacy attainment gap in favour of FSM pupils, dependent on Key Stage — 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
• Among FSM-eligible pupils, music workshops showed no impact on attainment relative to the drama control — related
• Small group and one-to-one interventions produced larger literacy gains for FSM pupils than whole class or whole school approaches — 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 TextNow Transition Programme did not significantly improve reading comprehension at the primary-secondary transition; participating pupils made slightly less progress than controls — related
• The TextNow programme produced no statistically significant difference in enjoyment of reading or motivation to read compared with the comparison group — related