A study published in The Curriculum Journal presents the findings of a randomised controlled trial that evaluated the efficacy of the Bug Club programme on the reading, spelling and vocabulary skills of pupils in the first two years of primary school compared to pupils in a control group.
Bug Club is a whole-school reading programme based on the
principles of guided reading and synthetic phonics. It is offered as part of,
rather than in addition to, standard literacy lessons. This study analysed data
from 1,273 pupils in Years 1 and 2 from 30 schools in the UK (15 intervention,
15 control). Pupils were tested at baseline and again at 6 months, 12 months,
and 18 months, using the InCAS reading assessment for 5- to 11-year-olds.
At the 6- and 12-month tests, pupils in the Bug Club schools showed
more progress on the standardised reading measure than pupils in control
schools (effect size = +0.18 and +0.16). For disadvantaged pupils, the picture
was mixed. After six months, there was a greater impact on reading gains in
schools with high levels of pupils eligible for free school meals than those in
control schools. After twelve months, this effect had disappeared, but pupils
eligible for pupil premium were found to have improved more on reading gains
than those in control schools.
of Bug Club: a randomised control trial of a whole school primary aged reading
programme (February 2020), The Curriculum
Journal. DOI: 10.1002/curj.29
Class-Wide Function-Related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT) is a
classroom programme designed to increase academic, social and behavioural
success for pupils. The programme emphasises group contingencies and
self-management. It teaches positive social skills, uses teacher praise and
group points for good behaviour, incorporates goal setting and provides
In order to build CW-FIT’s research base, a randomised controlled trial was carried out over four years, designed to replicate one site’s original study by adding two more research groups and to include investigators who were not the developers of the programme.
Seven elementary (primary) schools in three US states participated. Pupils were in grades K–6 (Years 1–7), 55% were of minority ethnicities, and 69% received free- or reduced-price school meals. Within each school were experimental and control classes – 83 experimental and 74 control in total. Baseline data collection included measures of pupil time on-task and teacher use of reinforcement during business-as-usual conditions for two to three weeks. At baseline, no teacher was observed using token rewards or group rewards. During the study, control group teachers received a two-hour training in general classroom management and were referred to district protocol when pupil behaviour problems occurred. Experimental group teachers implemented CW-FIT during one targeted period three to five times per week from October to March. During CW-FIT sessions, after teaching pupils the appropriate way to get attention, follow directions, and ignore inappropriate behaviour, the teacher set a timer at two to five minute intervals, awarding a point to teams with all members behaving at that moment. At the end of class, awards were given to all team members who met specific goals.
At the end
of the study, results favoured the CW-FIT group. On-task behaviour for CW-FIT pupils
increased from 55% to 80%, while the control group remained close to baseline
at 58%. Teacher classroom management behaviours increased from 52% to 86% for
the CW-FIT group, but remained at 55% for the control group. These results are
reflective of earlier studies’ findings.
Function-Related Intervention Teams (CW-FIT): student and teacher outcomes from
a multisite randomized replication trial (September 2018), The Elementary School Journal 119, no. 1
The results of a randomised controlled trial of a whole-school intervention designed to build a supportive school environment and reduce bullying found that it did not produce significant changes in the treatment schools.
The study, published in Journal of Youth and Adolescence, evaluated the Restorative Practices Intervention to assess the extent of implementation and changes in school connectedness, positive developmental outcomes, and bullying. The intervention involves training all school staff on how to carry out 11 restorative practices (eg, communication approaches that aim to build stronger bonds among leadership, staff, and pupils such as using “I” statements, encouraging pupils to express their feelings).
For the randomised
controlled trial, Joie Acosta and colleagues collected baseline and two-year
post survey data from pupils in grades 6 and 7 (Years 7 and 8) at 14 US middle
schools. Schools were randomised so that seven schools received the
Restorative Practices Intervention and seven did not.
The results of the study suggest that the intervention did
not produce any significant changes in the treatment schools. Intervention
schools did not report more school connectedness, better school climate, more
positive peer relationships, or less victimisation. Indeed, the Restorative
Practices Intervention only delivered a modest amount of restorative experiences,
and not much different from the amount control schools received.
However, pupils’ self-reported experience with restorative
practices significantly predicted improved school climate and connectedness,
peer attachment and social skills, and reduced cyberbullying victimisation. The
researchers conclude that, while more work is needed on how interventions can
reliably produce restorative experiences, this study suggests that the
restorative model can be useful in promoting positive behaviours and addressing
of a whole-school change intervention: findings from a two-year cluster-randomized
trial of the restorative practices intervention (March 2019), Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48
A study published in the American Educational Research Journal compares reading processes and outcomes for pupils when reading a text from paper with the same text delivered on a touchscreen laptop.
Amanda P Goodwin and colleagues conducted the study with 371
pupils in grades 5–8 (Years 6–9) from three schools in an urban district in the
southeastern US. Pupils were randomly assigned to two conditions: Condition A
read the first section of a text on paper, and the second half digitally,
whereas pupils in Condition B read the first part digitally and the second part
on paper. The content in both conditions was identical. When reading on paper, pupils
had access to highlighters, pens and sticky notes; when reading digitally, they
had access to digital highlighters, annotating and dictionaries.
Results suggest that pupils highlight and annotate more when reading on paper vs. digital text. Also, reading on paper vs. digitally was slightly supportive of reading comprehension for the longer sections of text, although effect sizes were very small (odds ratio of 1.077).
Source: Digital versus
paper reading processes and links to comprehension for middle school students (December
209), American Educational Research
A study published in Public Health Research reports on an evaluation of the Learning Together intervention, which aims to reduce bullying and aggression and to promote pupil health and well-being.
Forty secondary schools in southeast England participated in
the trial, with 20 schools randomly assigned to deliver the intervention over
three years, and 20 schools continuing with existing practices. In the
intervention schools, staff and pupils collaborated in an “action group” to
change school rules and policies, with the goal of making it a healthier environment.
This included focusing on improving relationships rather than merely punishment-based
approaches to discipline, and using a classroom curriculum aimed at encouraging
All pupils completed a questionnaire at the start of the trial, and this was repeated three years later. Results showed that self-reported experiences of bullying victimisation were lower in intervention schools than in control schools (adjusted effect size = –0.08). There was no evidence of a reduction in pupil reports of aggression. Pupils in intervention schools also had higher scores on quality of life and psychological well-being measures, and lower scores on a psychological difficulties measure. They also reported lower rates of having smoked, drunk alcohol, been offered or tried illicit drugs, or been in contact with the police in the previous 12 months.
Source: Modifying the secondary school environment to
reduce bullying and aggression: the INCLUSIVE cluster RCT. (November
2019). Public Health Research Volume:
7, Issue: 18
A study published in the Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness reports on the impact of Word Generation on academic language, vocabulary and reading comprehension outcomes for pupils in grades 4 to 7 (Years 5 to 8).
Word Generation (WG) is a vocabulary programme designed to
teach academic vocabulary words through English, maths, science and social
studies classroom activities. For this study, 7,725 fourth to seventh grade pupils
from 25 schools in the northeast US were randomised within pairs to either
treatment or business-as-usual control conditions. In treatment schools, the
programme was implemented throughout the school year. In grades 4 and 5 (Years
5 and 6), this involved 12 ten-day long units of 45-50 minutes per day. For
grades 6 and 7 (Years 7 and 8), the programme was implemented in six-week long
units designed to take 45 minutes each day in science and social studies
At the end of the first year, pupils in grades 4 and 5 also
made improvements on their academic language skills (ES = +0.06), and in their
reading comprehension at the end of the second year (ES = +0.15). Reading
comprehension also improved at the end of the second year for pupils in grades
6 and 7 (ES = +0.10).
The study also showed gains on tests of the specific words
emphasised in the programme, but these effects are considered potentially
Experimental effects of Word Generation on vocabulary, academic language,
perspective taking and reading comprehension in high-poverty schools (August
2019), Journal of Research on Educational