Search

Background: Effective reading comprehension teaching is an aspiration of education systems across the world. Teaching incorporating reciprocal reading theory and evidence is an internationally popular approach for improving comprehension. Aims: This paper uses two large cluster randomized controlled trials of similar reciprocal reading interventions implemented in different ways to compare their effectiveness. Sample: The two interventions had the same teacher professional development, reciprocal reading activities and dosage/exposure, but varied in their implementation, with one delivered as a whole-class ('universal') version for pupils aged 8-9 years and the other a small group ('targeted') version for pupils aged 9-11 years with specific comprehension difficulties. Methods: Two large-scale cluster RCTs were conducted in 98 schools with N = 3699 pupils in the universal trial and N = 1523 in the targeted trial. Results: Multi-level models showed significant effects for the targeted version of the intervention on pupil reading comprehension (g = 0.18) and overall reading (g = 0.14). No significant effects were found for the whole class version. A sub-group analyses of disadvantaged pupils showed the targeted intervention's effects were even larger on reading comprehension (g = 0.25). Conclusions: The evidence suggested that this reciprocal reading intervention worked best when implemented in small groups and targeted for pupils with specific comprehension difficulties and particularly for pupils in disadvantaged circumstances. Comments: This evaluation shows that even if a reading comprehension intervention is underpinned by strong theory and evidence-based practice, its effectiveness can still depend on implementation choices.

Background The need to engage boys in gender-transformative relationships and sexuality education (RSE) to reduce adolescent pregnancy is endorsed by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Objectives To evaluate the effects of If I Were Jack on the avoidance of unprotected sex and other sexual health outcomes. Design A cluster randomised trial, incorporating health economics and process evaluations. Setting Sixty-six schools across the four nations of the UK. Participants Students aged 13–14 years. Intervention A school-based, teacher-delivered, gender-transformative RSE intervention (If I Were Jack) versus standard RSE. Main outcome measures Self-reported avoidance of unprotected sex (sexual abstinence or reliable contraceptive use at last sex) after 12–14 months. Secondary outcomes included knowledge, attitudes, skills, intentions and sexual behaviours. Results The analysis population comprised 6556 students: 86.6% of students in the intervention group avoided unprotected sex, compared with 86.4% in the control group {adjusted odds ratio 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.26], p = 0.42}. An exploratory post hoc analysis showed no difference for sexual abstinence [78.30% intervention group vs. 78.25% control group; adjusted odds ratio 0.85 (95% CI 0.58 to 1.24), p = 0.39], but more intervention group students than control group students used reliable contraception at last sex [39.62% vs. 26.36%; adjusted odds ratio 0.52 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.920), p = 0.025]. Students in schools allocated to receive the intervention had significantly higher scores on knowledge [adjusted mean difference 0.18 (95% CI 0.024 to 0.34), p = 0.02], gender-equitable attitudes and intentions to avoid unintended pregnancy [adjusted mean difference 0.61 (95% CI 0.16 to 1.07), p = 0.01] than students in schools allocated to receive the control. There were positive but non-significant differences in sexual self-efficacy and communication skills. The total mean incremental cost of the intervention compared with standard RSE was £2.83 (95% CI –£2.64 to £8.29) per student. Over a 20-year time horizon, the intervention is likely to be cost-effective owing to its impact on unprotected sex because it would result in 379 (95% CI 231 to 477) fewer unintended pregnancies, 680 (95% CI 189 to 1467) fewer sexually transmitted infections and a gain of 10 (95% CI 5 to 16) quality-adjusted life-years per 100,000 students for a cost saving of £9.89 (95% CI –£15.60 to –£3.83). Limitations The trial is underpowered to detect some effects because four schools withdrew and the intraclass correlation coefficient (0.12) was larger than that in sample size calculation (0.01). Conclusions We present, to our knowledge, the first evidence from a randomised trial that a school-based, male engagement gender-transformative RSE intervention, although not effective in increasing avoidance of unprotected sex (defined as sexual abstinence or use of reliable contraception at last sex) among all students, did increase the use of reliable contraception at last sex among students who were, or became, sexually active by 12–14 months after the intervention. The trial demonstrated that engaging all adolescents early through RSE is important so that, as they become sexually active, rates of unprotected sex are reduced, and that doing so is likely to be cost-effective. Future work Future studies should consider the longer-term effects of gender-transformative RSE as students become sexually active. Gender-transformative RSE could be adapted to address broader sexual health and other settings. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN10751359. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (PHR 15/181/01) and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Plain language summary Adolescent pregnancy is often thought to be an issue for young women alone, but it is important to engage young men to tackle the problem and find solutions. The If I Were Jack intervention was especially designed to engage with boys as well as girls aged 14 years and to promote positive masculinity and gender equality to prevent adolescent pregnancy and promote positive sexual health. It uses tailored interactive films and resources, made with the help of students and teachers, to make it relevant to each of the four UK nations. This relationship and sexuality education intervention encourages adolescents to avoid unprotected sex by delaying sexual activity until they feel ready and to use reliable contraception once sexually active. It also promotes knowledge, attitudes (such as beliefs about gender and masculinities), skills and intentions for safe and pleasurable relationships. In this trial, we compared students in 33 schools randomly allocated to deliver the intervention with students in 33 schools that continued with their usual relationship and sexuality education practices. Four schools withdrew, two because of COVID-19 school closures. This left a total of 6556 students who completed questionnaires at the start of the study and 12–14 months later. Responses from all these students showed that If I Were Jack had a positive impact on knowledge, attitudes and intentions required for safe and pleasurable relationships, but did not have a significant effect on overall avoidance of unprotected sex. This was because the intervention had no effect on delaying sexual activity. However, we found that the intervention was effective in increasing the use of reliable contraception as students became sexually active, as well as for those who already were sexually active prior to receiving the intervention. We also found that If I Were Jack was likely to provide value for money by reducing unintended pregnancies and improving sexual health. Scientific summary Background The need for relationship and sexuality education (RSE) to especially engage with young men and boys to promote positive sexual health for all, and to be gender transformative to challenge the gender inequalities that underlie young women’s generally poorer sexual health outcomes (especially in relation to sexual violence, adolescent pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections), is widely endorsed by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, among others. Objectives The JACK trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the If I Were Jack intervention, a schools-based RSE intervention, which is designed to especially engage young men as well as young women and promote joint responsibility in preventing adolescent pregnancy by avoiding unprotected sex and in promoting positive sexual health and relationships. We assessed whether there would be higher rates of self-reported avoidance of unprotected sex (either by remaining sexually abstinent or by using a reliable form of contraception) among students in schools allocated to use If I Were Jack than among those in schools that continued with their usual RSE. Design We undertook a multicentre, parallel-group cluster randomised trial of the If I Were Jack intervention with schools as the unit of randomisation. We incorporated a health economic cost–consequences analysis and process evaluation. Setting The trial was conducted in secondary-level schools across the four nations of the UK. Recruitment We sampled schools from Department of Education-listed secondary schools in each nation of the UK (Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England), with consideration of the socioeconomic status of schools [based on the proportion of students eligible for free school meals (FSM) as indicated by the School Meal Census]. In each nation, eligible schools were stratified into two levels according to FSM eligibility rates (schools above and below the median national percentage of FSM for all eligible schools). Independent private, special, and Irish/Welsh-medium and Scottish Gaelic schools and schools with

The impact that mobile devices actually have on educational outcomes remains unclear. Regardless, investment in tablets for use in the primary school classroom is increasing year on year (BESA, 2015). Given that funding cuts due to wider austerity are commonplace in education as in other areas of life, it is critical that investment is made in the most effective tools and approaches to best support educational outcomes. Educators must therefore be able to access the most up to date evidence to support decision making. A systematic review of existing literature will provide one such accessible resource. The review team has elected to focus on primary education, rather than the full spectrum of educational experience. Primary and post-primary education, and the use of technology within these, are very different, in terms of the subjects studied, the approach to pedagogy, and activities undertaken. As a team with limited resources, and a desire to produce a review which has the potential to influence practice, we would rather invest in the detail of primary education rather than try to cover both and risk dilution of the discussion.

Background: Investment in mobile devices to support primary or elementary education is increasing and must be informed by robust evidence to demonstrate impact. This systematic review of randomised controlled trials sought to identify the overall impact of mobile devices to support literacy and numeracy outcomes in mainstream primary classrooms. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to understand how mobile devices are used in primary/elementary education around the world, and in particular, determine how activities undertaken using mobile devices in the primary classroom might impact literacy and numeracy attainment for the pupils involved. Within this context, mobile devices are defined as tablets (including iPads and other branded devices), smartphones (usually those with a touchscreen interface and internet connectivity) and handheld games consoles (again usually with touchscreen and internet‐enabled). The interventions of interest were those aimed at improving literacy and/or numeracy for children aged 4–12 within the primary/elementary school (or equivalent) classroom. Specifically, the review aimed to answer the following research questions: ‐What is the effect of mobile device integration in the primary school classroom on children's literacy and numeracy outcomes?‐Are there specific devices which are more effective in supporting literacy and numeracy? (Tablets, smartphones, or handheld games consoles)‐Are there specific classroom integration activities which moderate effectiveness in supporting literacy and numeracy?‐Are there specific groups of children for whom mobile devices are more effective in supporting literacy and numeracy? (Across age group and gender).‐Do the benefits of mobile devices for learning last for any time beyond the study?‐What is the quality of available evidence on the use of mobile devices in primary/elementary education, and where is further research needed in this regard? An Expert Advisory Group supported the review process at key stages to ensure relevance to current practice. Search Methods: The search strategy was designed to retrieve both published and unpublished literature, and incorporated relevant journal and other databases with a focus on education and social sciences. Robust electronic database searches were undertaken (12 databases, including APA PsychInfo, Web of Science, ERIC, British Education Index and others, and relevant government and other websites), as well as a hand‐search of relevant journals and conference proceedings. Contact was also made with prominent authors in the field to identify any ongoing or unpublished research. All searches and author contact took place between October and November 2020. The review team acknowledges that new studies will likely have emerged since and are not captured at this time. A further update to the review in the future is important and would build on the evidence reflected here. Selection Criteria: The review included children within mainstream primary/elementary/kindergarten education settings in any country (aged 4–12), and interventions or activities initiated within the primary school classroom (or global equivalent) that used mobile devices (including tablets, smartphones, or hand‐held gaming devices) to intentionally support literacy or numeracy learning. In terms of study design, only Randomised Controlled Trials were included in the review. Data Collection and Analysis: A total of 668 references were identified through a robust search strategy including published and unpublished literature. Following duplicate screening, 18 relevant studies, including 11,126 participants, 14 unique interventions, and 46 relevant outcome measures were synthesised using Robust Variance Estimation and a random effects meta‐analysis model. Risk of Bias assessment was undertaken by three reviewers using the ROB2 tool to assess the quality of studies, with 13 studies rated as having some concerns, and 5 as having high risk of bias. Qualitative data was also extracted and analysed in relation to the types of interventions included to allow a comparison of the key elements of each. Main Results: A positive, statistically significant combined effect was found (Cohen's d = 0.24, CI 0.0707 to 0.409, p < 0.01), demonstrating that in the studies and interventions included, children undertaking maths or literacy interventions using mobile devices achieved higher numeracy or literacy outcomes than those using an alternative device (e.g. a laptop or desktop computer) or no device (class activities as usual). However these results should be interpreted with caution given the risk of bias assessment noted above (5 studies rated high risk of bias and 13 rated as having some concerns). As the interventions and classroom circumstances differed quite widely, further research is needed to understand any potential impact more fully. Sensitivity analysis aimed to identify moderating factors including age or gender, screen size, frequency/dosage of intervention exposure, and programme implementation features/activities (based on Puentedura's [2009] SAMR model of technology integration). There were too few studies identified to support quantitative analysis of sufficient power to draw robust conclusions on moderating factors, and insufficient data to determine impact beyond immediate post‐test period. Sensitivty analysis was also undertaken to exclude the five studies identified as having a high risk of bias, to identify any impact they may have on overall findings. Authors' Conclusions: Overall, this review demonstrates that for the specific interventions and studies included, mobile device use in the classroom led to a significant, positive effect on literacy and numeracy outcomes for the children involved, bringing positive implications for their continued use in primary education. However given the concerns on risk of bias assessment reported above, the differing circumstances, interventions and treatment conditions and intensities, the findings must be interpreted with caution. The review also supports the need for further robust research to better understand what works, under what circumstances, and for whom, in the use of mobile devices to support learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A randomized controlled trial was used to evaluate the effects of a prosocial behavior after-school program called Mate-Tricks for 9- and 10-year-old children and their parents living in an area of significant socioeconomic disadvantage. The children were randomly assigned to an intervention (n = 220) or a control group (n = 198). Children were compared on measures of prosocial behavior, antisocial behavior, and related outcome measures. The trial found adverse effects on four outcomes among the intervention group compared to the control group: antisocial behavior increased on two different measures (d = 0.20) and (d = 0.18), child-reported liberal parenting increased (d = 0.16), and child reported authoritarian parenting also increased (d = 0.20). In addition, parental participation was significantly associated with several program outcomes. It was concluded, that group based after-school behavior programs may have the potential to cause iatrogenic effects and must be designed, piloted, evaluated and implemented with a high degree of care.

Highlights • Protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in 97 primary schools. • The intervention aims to improve reading comprehension and overall literacy. • The intervention is a teacher training programme for reading comprehension. Abstract This paper presents the research protocol for a pragmatic RCT of the Reciprocal Reading programme. Reciprocal Reading (RR) is a workforce development programme that supports practicing Teachers/Teaching Assistants develop and deliver comprehension instruction in mainstream UK settings for pupils aged 8–11 years. The protocol outlines a research design that will assess whether the RR programme can improve a number of specific outcomes in intervention group pupils, in a sample of schools experiencing higher than average levels of disadvantage. The primary outcome for analysis is reading comprehension with secondary outcomes of overall literacy, reading accuracy and comprehension pre-cursors at the child and school level. The study will also include a process evaluation using qualitative data and quantitative implementation data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]