Affordable Online Maths Tuition showed no evidence of impact on the Key Stage 2 maths test compared with business-as-usual teaching in Year 6¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i0 The randomised trial found no evidence that the intervention improved KS2 maths attainment versus business as usual, with a printed effect size of -0. → Torgerson et al. 2016

Evidence¶

Torgerson et al. 2016¶

Carole Torgerson, Hannah Ainsworth, Hannah Buckley, Gillen Hampden-Thompson, Catherine Hewitt, Deborah Humphry, Laura Jefferson, Natasha Mitchell, David Torgerson. (2016). Affordable Online Maths Tuition: Evaluation report and executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581116

q3 · i0 · causal · r2

Cluster randomised controlled trial in 64 schools with 600 identified pupils, analysed by intention to treat using a linear mixed model of KS2 maths fine mark scores. Table 1 reports an effect size of -0.03 (95% CI -0.35 to 0.28), described as "-11" estimated months' progress. The null was not an equivalence test.

"The impact evaluation found no evidence that the intervention had an impact on the primary outcome of the Key Stage 2 maths test, compared with ‘business as usual’ teaching in Year 6."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A year of weekly P4C improved Key Stage 2 progress in reading and maths relative to business-as-usual — related
• Nine light-touch dissemination interventions had no impact on pupils' Key Stage 2 English attainment in a large school-level RCT — related
• The intervention showed no evidence of impact on the Key Stage 2 reading test, a secondary outcome — related
• RLC showed no evidence of impact on KS2 reading outcomes in a two-year randomised controlled trial — related