Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A RCT evaluation of The Letterbox Club in Northern Ireland
Dr Karen Winter and Jennifer [email protected]
• Poor educational outcomes
• Measures: attendance rates; suspensions; exclusions; attainment in tests, exams and formal qualifications
• Contributory factors: interplay of individual child; familial and care related characteristics
• Disability; abuse; trauma; physical/emotional ill health; poor familial relationships; multiple transitions; poor attachment; stigma; labelling; lack of support for carers
Context
• Legislation
• Policy and practice initiatives
• Macro level - structures and processes
• Micro level – direct to child interventions
• Concern with evidence, what works, cost effectiveness
Initiatives
The Letterbox Club
• Once monthly parcel for 6 months • May to October• Books, stationery, number games• Addressed to the child• Personalised letter• Interest level, not ability level• Aims • www.letterboxclub.org.uk
Contents
• Letterbox Club began 2002• 2003-2006 pilot work• 2007 – national pilot funded by government• 2008; 2010 evaluations by programme designers
in England and Northern Ireland• Gains in reading and number skills • 2011 independent evaluation data in Northern
Ireland – gains reported• www.qub.ac.uk/cee
Available research
Can the gains in reading and number skills be attributed directly to the Letterbox Club
intervention?
The gap
Comparison using standardised scores - limits
Importance of control group – identical, random allocation, evenly balanced, variations accounted for
Essential if we are serious about addressing inequality Next slides consider 3 elements to study design: the RCT, logic model and the process evaluation.
The gap
• Does not account for previous research around reading
• Assumes a linear movement • Hinges on feelings of ownership• Assumes children do not have access to
materials• Middle class deficit view of children in care
Logic modelMismatch between inputs and anticipated outcomes?
Current studyThe RCT study
Flow chartRCT study participants
Measures• Neale Analysis of reading ability• Elementary Reading Attitude Survey (Garfield)
Other data• Age• Gender• Type of placement• Trust area
Logic modelData collected
• Placement moves• Carer information• Length of time in care• Siblings/ foster siblings• Letterbox fun days
• Attitudes• Ethics• Collaborators• Fieldworkers• Results • Responses to results
RCT challenges
• Interviews foster children and their carers• Exploring:• what actually happens at time of receipt of
the parcel; • engagement with parcels;• views on parcel content;• and ongoing support with the materials.
Logic modelProcess evaluation
• Further Studies- nurture groups and school based interventions
• Collaborations- with colleagues in Canada and REES centre (Oxford)
• Development of the programme
Many Thanks!
Logic modelThe Future
