Effects of a Cognitive Acceleration Programme on Year 1 pupils (Updated)

This digest found in

Thinking skills

How did the pupils benefit?

The outcome data showed that

on the conservation test pupils in the intervention classes made an average gain of 2.02 units compared to 1.06 for pupils in the control groups; and
on the drawing test the average gain for pupils in the intervention classes was 6.40 units compared to 3.77 for pupils in the control classes.

(Click here for an explanation of these two types of test.)

The difference in gains made by the pupils in the intervention classes compared to those in the control classes were 0.956 (effect size 0.43) and 2.636 (effect size 0.47) for the conservation and drawing tests respectively (Click to Where can I find out more? to find out more about effect size). The gains made by the intervention groups on the conservation test were particularly significant, in the authors’ view, because there were no activities in the intervention programme relating to conservation. The authors regarded this figure as providing evidence of transfer.

Although the overall gain made by the intervention children was significantly higher than that of the control groups, there were signs of a gender effect. For example, on the conservation test the differences in gain between intervention classes and control classes were 1.30 for girls and 1.18 for boys.

(To find out more about gender differences in achievements of boys and girls click to www.gtce.org.uk/researchofthemonth and follow the link to ‘An Investigation into Gender Differences in Achievement’ and also see Stephen Gorard in Where can I find out more?)

Five out of fourteen CA classes scored higher than any of the seven control classes on the conservation test, while seven CA classes achieved higher than any control class on the drawing test. The authors concluded from this finding that there was no ‘special teacher’ effect and that the gains arose through the intervention programme (the activities and the professional development programme) itself.

Your path: Home > Welcome to The Research Informed Practice Site (TRIPS) > Themes > Thinking skills > Effects of a Cognitive Acceleration Programme on Year 1 pupils > How did the pupils benefit?
Research Home Themes \| Find digests \| About the digests resources glossary researchers contact TRIPS Introduction What did the research show? What is cognitive intervention all about? How was the research designed? What were the main components of the programme? What were the characteristic features of the activities used in the project? What happened in a classroom activity? How did the pupils benefit? How were the teachers prepared for the intervention? Which tests were used on the pupils? Implications Where can I find out more? Send us your feedback Collated digests To find out more about collated digests click here Get Word Reader Effects of a Cognitive Acceleration Programme on Year 1 pupils (Updated) This digest found in Thinking skills Send to a friend Word doc 100KB Printer friendly Collate for later How did the pupils benefit? The outcome data showed that on the conservation test pupils in the intervention classes made an average gain of 2.02 units compared to 1.06 for pupils in the control groups; and on the drawing test the average gain for pupils in the intervention classes was 6.40 units compared to 3.77 for pupils in the control classes. (Click here for an explanation of these two types of test.) The difference in gains made by the pupils in the intervention classes compared to those in the control classes were 0.956 (effect size 0.43) and 2.636 (effect size 0.47) for the conservation and drawing tests respectively (Click to Where can I find out more? to find out more about effect size). The gains made by the intervention groups on the conservation test were particularly significant, in the authors’ view, because there were no activities in the intervention programme relating to conservation. The authors regarded this figure as providing evidence of transfer. Although the overall gain made by the intervention children was significantly higher than that of the control groups, there were signs of a gender effect. For example, on the conservation test the differences in gain between intervention classes and control classes were 1.30 for girls and 1.18 for boys. (To find out more about gender differences in achievements of boys and girls click to www.gtce.org.uk/researchofthemonth and follow the link to ‘An Investigation into Gender Differences in Achievement’ and also see Stephen Gorard in Where can I find out more?) Five out of fourteen CA classes scored higher than any of the seven control classes on the conservation test, while seven CA classes achieved higher than any control class on the drawing test. The authors concluded from this finding that there was no ‘special teacher’ effect and that the gains arose through the intervention programme (the activities and the professional development programme) itself.