ethanporcaro/eric-fulltext-meta huggingface dataset:
Achieve Together Bournemouth Partnership: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Callanan, Meg
Date: 2017-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Foreign Countries,Partnerships in Education,Program Evaluation,Pilot Projects,Elementary Secondary Education,Economically Disadvantaged,Educational Assessment,Program Implementation,Feasibility Studies,Interviews,Qualitative Research,Models,Alignment (Education),Stakeholders,Educational Change,Longitudinal Studies,Educational Attainment,Statistical Analysis

The Achieve Together Bournemouth Partnership (&quot;the Partnership&quot;) was a pilot collaboration between Teach First, Teaching Leaders, and The Future Leaders Trust. It was a new initiative that aimed to work with primary and secondary schools and the wider community in two socially deprived areas of Bournemouth (Boscombe and West Howe) to improve educational outcomes of children. The Partnership was funded by J. P. Morgan and the Education Endowment Foundation and was a three-year programme which commenced in schools in September 2013 and finished in August 2016, following a nine-month set up period. This pilot involved six secondary and three primary schools that met the providers' eligibility criteria relating to high levels of pupils living in deprivation. This was a small scale &quot;test and learn&quot; pilot, and, as such, the evaluation focused on a qualitative assessment of implementation and feasibility, mostly through interviews with participating schools and the project team. The following are among the key conclusions from the evaluation: (1) The Achieve Together Bournemouth Partnership model is not suitable for trial because of difficulties in engaging sufficient schools with all elements of the model; (2) Aligning projects undertaken by participants of the different leadership programmes was challenging, despite being a key aim of the model. Of the four school-led projects taken forward, none involved participants on all three of the individual programmes; (3) Stakeholders thought a longer timescale was needed to embed area-based change and questions were raised over whether schools have the capacity and are best placed to take the lead on area-based change; (4) Average attainment in participating schools has not changed dramatically since involvement with the pilot. However, given the small-scale and area-based nature of the project, it would have been difficult to identify impact with confidence; and (5) The programme changed and developed over the course of the three-year pilot. Initiatives of this type are likely to need to continuously adapt, making it difficult to specify the core components for future evaluations.
Chess in Schools: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Jerrim, John
Date: 2016-07-00
Type: Tests/Questionnaires
Subjects: Elementary Schools,Elementary School Students,Games,Competition,Foreign Countries,Intervention,Randomized Controlled Trials,Mathematics Achievement,Program Effectiveness,Scores,Comparative Analysis,Mathematics Tests,Observation,Teacher Surveys,Principals,Student Surveys,Semi Structured Interviews,Statistical Analysis

Chess in Primary Schools is a whole-school approach to teaching primary school children how to play chess. Children take 30 hours of chess lessons delivered by a tutor who is an experienced chess player, and the school is given the option to set up a chess club as a lunchtime or after-school activity. Chess classes are delivered during the school day and are expected to replace subjects such as music or PE. The intervention was evaluated using a two-armed randomised controlled trial. The trial took place over the 2013/2014 academic year and assessed the impact of one year of Chess in Primary Schools on the mathematics attainment of pupils in Year 5. It was an effectiveness trial, with the intervention tested under realistic conditions in a large number of schools. This study looks at whether the intervention had an impact on attainment one year after the intervention had ended in June 2015. One hundred schools across 11 local education authorities (LEAs) in England participated in the trial, a total of 4,009 pupils. A process evaluation was also carried out to answer questions about implementation and to help explain the findings of the trial. The programme was delivered by the education charity Chess in Schools and Communities (CSC). Key conclusions include: (1) There is no evidence that the intervention had a positive impact on mathematics attainment for the children in the trial, as measured by Key Stage 2 scores one year after the intervention ended. The same is true for science and reading; (2) There is no evidence that the intervention had a positive impact on Key Stage 2 scores for children eligible for free school meals (FSM); (3) Although a current school teacher is allocated to every chess class, it is desirable for the tutors themselves to have strong class management and teaching skills. Without these, it was difficult to ensure that all children were suitably engaged in the chess lessons; (4) For successful implementation, class teachers need to work closely with the tutor and actively contribute to the intervention. It was felt that classes were less effective if the teacher did not actively take part, or was present only at the beginning and end of the class; and (5) Half of the pupils who participated in the trial said that they liked the chess lessons a lot, and only 8% reported that they didn't like them. School teachers were very positive about the intervention and its impact on pupils' skills and behaviour.
Accelerated Reader: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Gorard, Stephen
Date: 2015-02-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Reading Instruction,Computer Software,Educational Technology,Technology Uses in Education,Foreign Countries,Large Group Instruction,Reading Programs,Independent Reading,Reading Tests,Program Evaluation,Program Effectiveness,Randomized Controlled Trials,Comparative Analysis,Reading Skills,Standardized Tests,Interviews,Secondary Schools,Scores,Intervention

Accelerated Reader (AR) is a whole-group reading management and monitoring program that aims to foster the habit of independent reading among primary and early secondary age pupils. The internet-based software initially screens pupils according to their reading levels, and suggests books that match their reading age and reading interest. Pupils take computerized quizzes on the books they have read and earn AR points related to difficulty. The evaluation of Accelerated Reader involved 349 pupils in Year 7 who had not achieved secure National Curriculum Level 4 in their primary Key Stage 2 (KS2) results for English (across four secondary schools). 166 pupils were randomly allocated to receive the intervention for 22 weeks in phase one during their first year at secondary school, with the other 183 acting as a control and then receiving the intervention in phase two. Key conclusions from the evaluation are: (1) Accelerated Reader appears to be effective for weaker readers as a catch-up intervention at the start of secondary school; (2) A well-stocked library with a wide collection of books banded according to the Accelerated Reader readability formula, and easy access to computers with internet connection, are the main requirements for successful implementation; (3) Pupils at very low levels of reading may not be independent readers and would need initial support from teacher to start reading books; and (4) Schools can lead robust evaluations of their own planned interventions, under favorable circumstances, and with some advice and oversight from expert evaluators.
Challenge the Gap: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: West, Mel
Date: 2017-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Achievement Gap,Research Reports,Disadvantaged,Educational Attainment,After School Programs,Workshops,Intervention,Educational Cooperation,Educational Practices,Educational Resources,Educational Technology,School Visitation,Interviews,Progress Monitoring,Program Effectiveness,Program Evaluation,Evidence,School Surveys,Case Studies,Cost Effectiveness,Elementary Secondary Education,Academic Achievement,Foreign Countries,Randomized Controlled Trials

Challenge the Gap (CtG) is a school collaboration programme designed by Challenge Partners that aims to break the link between disadvantage and attainment. The main components of CtG are: (1) after-school workshops drawing on published research and evidenced practice; (2) focused in-school interventions with a selected cohort of disadvantaged pupils; (3) cross-school collaboration and practice development; and (4) practical tools and resources for use in schools and additional online materials. This project evaluated the 2012 version of the CtG programme. An initial pilot study began in late 2012 and focused on the feasibility of the approach with a group of 30 schools. The next phase of the evaluation involved 104 primary and secondary schools (21,041 pupils), which were funded by the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) to take part in the programme between 2013 and 2014, and then given the option to pay for a further year between 2014 and 2015, taken up by 49 schools. The evaluation assessed the impact on all participating schools, using 2015 Key Stage 2 or Key Stage 4 results. The main evaluation was a matched-controlled efficacy trial. Process evaluation data was collected through surveys, school visits, interviews, and monitoring postings on the CtG website. The project found no evidence that CtG increased average attainment for either primary or secondary school pupils, overall. The security of the primary school results is low to moderate, and the security for the secondary school results is low. The findings are different for children eligible for free school meals. Free school meals (FSM)-eligible children in CtG primary schools made 2 months' additional progress compared to similar children in other schools, while FSM-eligible children in CtG secondary schools made 2 months' fewer progress compared to similar children in other schools. Teachers and non-teaching staff from participating schools were extremely positive about the involvement of their schools in the CtG programme and valued both the professional development opportunities it provided and the opportunity to collaborate with partner schools. CtG is a flexible programme that allows lead schools to share best practice. There was large variation between the strategies that were adopted by the schools in the programme.
Discover Summer School: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Torgerson, David
Date: 2014-05-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Summer Programs,Reading Skills,Writing Skills,Low Achievement,English Instruction,Elementary School Students,Foreign Countries,Comparative Analysis,Program Evaluation,Program Effectiveness,Randomized Controlled Trials,Costs,Student Attitudes,Reading Tests,Writing Tests,Scores,Statistical Analysis,Intervention,Pretests Posttests

The Discover Summer School was a four-week programme which aimed to improve the reading and writing skills of children during the summer between Year 6 and Year 7. The programme was targeted at pupils who had been predicted to achieve below Level 4b in English by the end of Key Stage 2. Pupils meeting the eligibility criteria for the study, and due to transition from Year 6 to Year 7 in 2013, were recruited through 29 primary schools in proximity to the Discover Children's Story Centre in Stratford, London, in July and August 2013. The study involved 124 pupils from 29 local schools, of whom 76 were randomly selected to attend the summer school; the remaining 48 formed a comparison group. This evaluation was set up as an efficacy trial. An individually randomised controlled trial design was employed to compare outcomes for pupils attending the summer school with outcomes for pupils in a &quot;business as usual&quot; comparison group who did not attend. The evaluation was unable to provide a secure estimate of the programme's impact on reading or writing attainment, due to the low number of pupils who took part and the problems with testing. The programme was relatively expensive compared to other literacy catch-up approaches delivered in the normal school year. Given the relative cost of the programme, even if the indicative impact which was detected had been secure, as a way of improving academic outcomes other approaches are likely to be more cost-effective. Participating pupils enjoyed the programme and were engaged by the literacy workshops and the enrichment activities. The specific challenges of pupil recruitment, attendance, and test completion experienced should be considered prior to undertaking any further evaluations of summer schools. [Dr. Taeko Becque contributed to the writing of the statistical analysis plan appended to this report.]
Ashford Teaching Alliance Research Champion: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Griggs, Julia
Date: 2016-05-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Educational Research,Decision Making,Teaching Methods,Evidence Based Practice,Educational Needs,Conferences (Gatherings),Seminars,Faculty Development,Teacher Attitudes,Intervention,Attitude Change,Participation,Faculty Workload,Barriers,Program Effectiveness,Leadership Responsibility,Mixed Methods Research,Foreign Countries,Teacher Surveys,Interviews

The Ashford Teaching Alliance (ATA) Research Champion project (&quot;the programme&quot;) was a pilot intervention aimed at developing teaching expertise and practice by promoting the use of educational research in decision-making and teacher practice. The programme ran for one academic year (2014/2015) in five schools within the ATA. Delivery was led by a &quot;Research Champion,&quot; a senior teacher based at one of the schools who worked with research leads, other teachers, and senior leaders to promote engagement with research evidence. The programme had four key components: 'audits' of needs and research interests for individual schools; a series of research symposia for teachers; termly research and development &quot;twilight forums&quot; (events held at the end of the school day at one of the participating schools); and bespoke research brokerage. The principal objective of this pilot study was to explore whether, and to what extent, research communication and engagement strategies had the potential to improve teachers' use of, and attitudes towards, academic research to support pupils' progress. The project was funded through the EEF Research Use in Schools grants round which supported studies to test ways of increasing the impact of educational research in schools. It was jointly funded by the EEF, the Department for Education and the Mayor's London Schools Excellence Fund. Key conclusions include: (1) There was no evidence that teachers' attitudes towards research, or their use of research evidence in teaching practice, changed during the intervention; (2) Teachers found the research symposia and twilight events valuable, particularly as opportunities to learn about developments in educational research and reflect on teaching practice outside the classroom; (3) Attendance and engagement in the programme was occasionally low due to time pressures faced by teachers. This posed a serious threat to the feasibility of the programme; (4) A greater commitment from senior leadership teams to fully support staff with release time and classroom cover is likely to be necessary for successful implementation; and (5) The programme requires further development before it is ready for a trial. In particular it requires a clearer specification of the key features of the programme in terms of structure, content, and which components are required, and better information for schools on how much commitment is needed from teachers. [This project was jointly funded by the Education Endowment Foundation, the Department for Education and the Mayor's London Schools Excellence Fund.]
Evidence for Student-Centered Learning
Author: Kaput, Krista
Date: 2018-01-00
Type: Reports - Descriptive
Subjects: Student Centered Learning,Evidence,Public Education,Educational Change,Individualized Instruction,Student Interests,Cognitive Style,Cultural Background,Culturally Relevant Education,Educational History,Educational Practices,Educational Benefits,Equal Education,Educational Principles,Progressive Education,Educational Trends,Teacher Student Relationship,Student Needs,Self Concept,Student Empowerment,Competency Based Education,Educational Facilities,Educational Environment,Case Studies

For the past 35 years, the prevailing narrative about America's public education system is that it is &quot;broken.&quot; Reform efforts have failed to find a fix because they fundamentally misunderstand this reality: the system is not broken. It is doing exactly what it was designed to do--educate the masses in a standardized fashion that completely disregards who students are as individuals. In this report, author Krista Kaput makes the case for student-centered learning, a schooling design that shifts the model from adult-centered and standardized to student-centric and individualized. Specifically, the learning is personalized to the students' interests, learning styles, cultural identities, life experiences, and personal challenges. Drawing from a wide array of research, Kaput examines the history and current context of student-centered learning, and outlines seven principles of student-centered learning with examples of how they look in practice. When these principles are realized, Kaput argues that the result is learning that is equitable, relevant, and rigorous. To &quot;fix&quot; public education so all students can be successful and have their unique needs met, we must change the design of the system.
Boarding Chances for Children: A Report on Lessons Learned
Author: Murphy, David
Date: 2017-11-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Boarding Schools,Caseworkers,Social Work,Intervention,Child Welfare,Child Safety,Randomized Controlled Trials,Referral,Research Design,Program Effectiveness,Recruitment,Foreign Countries,Research Problems,Qualitative Research,Semi Structured Interviews

This report examines the range of factors that might influence the decision by social care professionals on the use of boarding schools as an intervention option for Children in Need (CiN) or children on a Child Protection Plan (CPP). Attempts to conduct a randomised controlled trial (RCT) failed to recruit participants. Initially, failure to recruit was attributed to randomisation inhibiting social care workers from making referrals. Subsequently, a Zelen's design was implemented with no improvement in recruitment. Finally, a two-stage design (including a first stage within-subjects design study where all participants received the intervention and a second stage matched comparison group) also failed to recruit. Despite the removal of randomisation it appeared that the intervention itself might be unappealing to social care workers.
Achieve Together: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Greaves, Ellen
Date: 2017-07-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Leadership Training,Disadvantaged Youth,Educational Improvement,Educational Certificates,Secondary Schools,Intervention,Comparative Analysis,Qualitative Research,Program Implementation,Program Evaluation,Program Effectiveness,Secondary School Teachers,Teacher Leadership,Interviews,Costs,Effect Size,Scores,Foreign Countries,Statistical Analysis

Achieve Together aims to improve pupil outcomes by supporting leadership development and collaboration within schools in disadvantaged areas. The programme was devised and delivered by three education charities: Teach First, Teaching Leaders, and The Future Leaders Trust. Participants on these individual programmes also collaborate on a school improvement initiative, drawing on insights from the individual programmes with planning and implementation support from the Achieve Together team. It is a whole-school intervention aiming to improve outcomes for all pupils in participating schools. Achieve Together was developed in 2013 and delivered from September 2014 until July 2016. This efficacy trial assessed the impact on General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) outcomes at the end of the second year of the programme. Results from 14 schools that received the intervention were compared to those of a well-matched comparison group. Qualitative research aimed to track implementation, delivery, and perceived impacts over the course of the intervention. Key conclusions include: (1) Pupils in Achieve Together schools made no additional progress, on average, compared to other children in the trial, as measured by GCSE results. The three padlock security rating means researchers are moderately confident in this result; (2) Similar results were found for children eligible, and not eligible, for free school meals, and children with higher and lower prior attainment, although these sub-group results are less secure because of the smaller numbers of pupils; (3) Participating schools reported a lack of clarity over the aims of Achieve Together and how the collaborative project should relate to the individual leadership programmes. The differing timelines of the individual programmes also appears to have hampered the collaborative projects; (4) Views on the collaborative project were mixed. Some participants found that the process increased reflective practice and provided impetus for further school improvement. Others felt that it was resource intensive and had minimal additional impact; and (5) Some teachers felt Achieve Together would have a positive impact on pupil attainment once new teaching skills and new initiatives were embedded. The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) data archive allows analysis of future results for these schools to assess whether this is the case.