Policy Challenge
Path 2 Copy Created with Sketch.
Program Type
Path 2 Copy Created with Sketch.
9
5
7
Learning In Primary
Teacher development (eLP)
19
-1
Evaluation Effect Average Age Observations Experimental Evaluation Country Intervention
Friedman 2010 39 Grade 2 9,558 Yes Mali Teachers received materials and training to improve reading
Lucas 2014 i 3 Grade 2 5,313 Yes Kenya Teachers received a 12-day training and coaching to improve reading
Vignoles 2015 10 Kindergarten 4,176 Yes United Kingdom Teachers received training and a toolkit to improve math learning
Lucas 2014 ii 15 Grade 2 3,595 Yes Uganda Teachers received a 12-day training and coaching to improve reading
Garet 2008 i 5 Grade 2 3,399 Yes United States Teachers received an 8-day training to improve reading
Garet 2008 ii 0 Grade 2 3,266 Yes United States Teachers received an 8-day training and coaching to improve reading
McNally 2014 -6 Grade 3 1,349 Yes United Kingdom Teachers received training on how to support disadvantaged students

Graph of Effects

This graph shows the effects of [Number of Evaluations] evaluations of [Program Type] programs. The first evaluation, [Evaluation name 1], estimated an effect of [Estimated effect Eval. 1] points (graphed with the top grey circle). Because this is an estimate, there is uncertainty about what the true effect is. But we know that the true effect will probably lie between a low value of [True effect lie between – Low value, Eval. 1] and a high value of [True effect lie between – High value, Eval. 1] (graphed with the top horizontal line). We can combine the estimates from all the evaluations and compute an average effect of [Estimated effect, Average] (graphed with the black circle). There is also uncertainty about where the true average effect is. But we know that the true average effect probably lies between [True effect lie between – Low value, Average] and [True effect lie between – High value, Average] points (graphed with the bottom horizontal line).
Evaluation Effects Low Value High Value Weight in Average Effect (%)
Friedman 2010 39 24 54 13
Garet 2008 i 5 -10 20 7
Garet 2008 ii 0 -15 15 7
Lucas 2014 i 3 -4 10 19
Lucas 2014 ii 15 6 25 17
McNally 2014 -6 -13 1 19
Vignoles 2015 10 1 19 17
Overall