A prior US randomised trial of the underlying approach found small significant positive effects for First Grade but not Second Grade pupils¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q1
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The report attributes to Chambers et al. (2011) a cluster randomised trial in 33 high-poverty US schools finding significant positive effects among First Grade pupils versus one-to-one tutoring, with effect sizes d=0.15 to d=0.21, but no significant effects on any of three measures in Second Grade. → Centre for Effective Education 2015

Evidence¶

Centre for Effective Education 2015¶

Centre for Effective Education, Queen's University Belfast. (2015). Tutoring with Alphie: Evaluation report and Executive summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581542

q1 · i? · causal · r1

Background evidence narrated by the report, attributed to Chambers et al. (2011); the review-style description notes the trial involved 33 high poverty schools and that the group approach let schools tutor more children than one-to-one control tutoring.

"found statistically significant positive effects among US First Grade pupils (6- year-olds) who received the programme when compared to a control group that received traditional one to one tutoring with effect sizes varying between Cohen’s d=0.15 and d=0.21 depending on which of the three literacy outcome measures were assessed"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Tutoring with Alphie showed a small positive but statistically non-significant effect on Year 6 reading comprehension (g=0.11) in the EEF trial — related
• Prior US studies cited in the report suggest RTI has modest positive effects on literacy for transition-age pupils, but the evidence base is mixed and small-scale — related
• Prior randomised trials of book-gifting programmes have shown little evidence of effects on children's reading skills — a broader claim this one bears on