Evidence-Based Literacy Support: The &quot;Literacy Octopus&quot; Trial. Evaluation Report and Executive Summary
Author: Lord, Pippa
Date: 2017-12-00
Type: Reports - Research
Subjects: Evidence Based Practice,Literacy,Intervention,Educational Resources,Measurement Objectives,Elementary Education,Qualitative Research,Observation,Interviews,Case Studies,English,Language Acquisition,Achievement Gains,Research Methodology,Outcome Measures,Student Participation,Fidelity,Program Implementation,Teacher Attitudes,Outcomes of Education,Delivery Systems,Formative Evaluation,Program Evaluation,Program Effectiveness,Information Dissemination,Foreign Countries,Randomized Controlled Trials,Control Groups,Statistical Analysis,Path Analysis

The Evidence-based Literacy Support-&quot;Literacy Octopus&quot; Trial tested a range of dissemination interventions and resources, all of which aimed to engage schools in using evidence-based materials to improve teaching and learning in Key Stage 2 literacy. Four delivery partners provided interventions. These included light-touch, &quot;passive&quot; approaches-such as emailing materials to schools-and more &quot;active&quot; support such as face-to-face events about putting research into practice. Separately, the &quot;Literacy Octopus&quot; Dissemination Trial (a sister trial which did not include a support element) tested the impact of some of the former, more passive approaches in a large-scale trial. This report concerns a trial of the latter, more active approaches, but also included &quot;passive&quot; elements. The qualitative evaluation included observations of activities, interviews, and case studies. Key conclusions include: (1) The project found no evidence that any of the interventions improved pupils' Key Stage 2 English scores. The five padlock security rating indicates high confidence in this result; (2) There was no evidence of impact on any of the six teacher Research Use Measures used in this trial. However, researchers have limited confidence in this result given the low response rate to the questionnaires designed to capture these outcomes, and some measures were only moderately reliable; (3) Schools' level of engagement varied: six out of ten schools did not engage to the level expected by the providers, although a small proportion engaged to a greater extent than expected (for example by hosting CPD sessions). Reasons for not engaging included lack of time, the timing and location of events, and a preference for face-to-face support rather than online or remote formats only; (4) Teachers felt research evidence was most effectively communicated when it was interactive, accessible, relevant, included a balanced and credible discussion of the evidence, and focused on how to apply the evidence in practice. Where schools went on to implement changes in light of Literacy Octopus engagement, these came about through mechanisms such as in-school collaboration, further enquiry, and trying out, reviewing, adapting, and embedding approaches; and (5) The lack of impact across the different interventions suggests that simply communicating research evidence to schools is not enough to improve outcomes. How easily the presented evidence can be used in practice--and the conditions in schools for implementing evidence based change--might be just as important. Further research should assess whether interventions can transform evidence into practical action, and develop supportive implementation conditions in schools.