The TextNow programme produced no statistically significant difference in enjoyment of reading or motivation to read compared with the comparison group¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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.
q3 i? No statistically significant difference was detected between participating pupils and comparison pupils on either the 'Students Like Reading' or 'Students Motivated to Read' measures. → 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
Secondary outcomes of the randomised trial used two PIRLS sub-scales administered under the same conditions as the primary test; the report notes the pre-test correlations with these attitude measures were fairly weak (r = 0.19 and r = 0.08), limiting the value of the pre-test covariate.
"In addition to attainment, pupils’ enjoyment of reading and motivation to read was assessed. No statistically significant difference was detected between participating pupils and those in the comparison group on either measure."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- 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 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
- Higher attendance at the 20-minute daily coaching sessions was associated with a positive impact on reading comprehension, significant only for secondary-school sessions — related
- The programme appeared more effective when coaches were highly trained, enthusiastic and committed and when secondary schools worked closely with feeder primaries — related
- Mental simulation training increased children's reading motivation in both grades, while control-group motivation showed no significant change — related
- A short growth mindset intervention raised growth mindset belief but produced no significant difference from control in recall performance, interest, enjoyment or perceived difficulty and effort, for either knowledge type — related
- Students report higher engagement and motivation with the AI tutor, with comparable enjoyment and growth mindset — 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.