Engage in Education

Engage in Education provided small group and one-to-one support for pupils in Years 9 and 10 who were at high risk of exclusion. The programme, which was created by Catch22, focused on pupils with low attainment, prior records of truancy and exclusion, and special educational needs. Targeted pupils received sessions in areas such as communication skills and anger management, and support from a keyworker in areas of identified need over 12 weeks. School teachers were also offered training.

school

Cross curriculum

Subject

accessibility

Key Stage 3

Key stage

EEF Summary

Reducing disruptive behaviour and exclusions are important priorities for schools. However, there is relatively little good evidence on this topic.

This study found no evidence that the Engage in Education intervention reduced exclusions. In fact, fixed-term exclusions, as reported by pupils, increased slightly in treatment schools in the year of the intervention. It was not possible to draw conclusions about the impact of the programme on academic outcomes in the year of intervention due to problems with testing.

Following up the children two years later, when they took GCSEs, there was no evidence that the programme had impacts on children’s educational attainment or exclusions, compared to children in the control group. The possible negative finding immediately after the intervention was not evident at the delayed follow-up.

This approach to reducing exclusions proved difficult to implement, and was relatively high-cost. EEF will consider evaluating other approaches to improving behaviour in future funding rounds, in order to improve the evidence base in this area.

Research Results

Attainment (Number of GCSE's taken)

-0.08 (Effect size)

N/A

Exclusion (Incident rate ratio)

+0.93 (Effect size)

N/A

Were the schools in the trial similar to my school?

  • There were 36 schools in the trial located in Greater London.
  • 80% of the pupils in the evaluation were eligible for Free School Meals.

Could I implement this in my school?

  • Sessions were led by two external youth workers trained by the delivery team
  • One-to-one support was provided by a keyworker in areas of identified need. 
  • In-school sessions were supplemented by home visits and phone calls with parents or care-givers. 
  • Teaching staff were also offered training on classroom behaviour management.
account_circle

External Tutors

Delivered by

person

Individuals

Participant group

date_range

12 Weeks

Intervention length

How much will it cost?

The cost per pupil per year (for the 12-week intervention) is estimated to be £881.66. This cost is likely to remain the same if delivery was repeated in subsequent years. This is based on delivering the EiE-L programme to 300 pupils with a total cost of £264,500. External staff managed the group and one-to-one sessions, so delivery time for teaching staff was minimal.

£

£882

Cost per pupil

people_outline

N/A

No. of Teachers/TAs

today

0.0 Days

Training time per staff member

Evaluation info

keyboard_arrow_down

Schools

36

Pupils

751

Key Stage

Key Stage 3

Start date

April 2013

End date

July 2019

Type of trial

Effectiveness Trial

Evaluation Conclusions

  1. In the short term, there was no evidence that the intervention reduced exclusions. Fixed-term exclusions, as reported by pupils, increased slightly in treatment schools.

  2. It was challenging to deliver the programme as intended. Twenty-four sessions were planned with each pupil (12 group, 12 individual) but only around seven of each took place. Although additional support to parents via phone calls and home visits were intended, few took place (n = 164 phone calls and 11 home visits).

  3. There was no evidence that the intervention improved the number of GCSEs achieved (graded A–G), two-years post-intervention follow-up.

  4. There was no evidence that the intervention reduced fixed-term school exclusions at two-year post-intervention follow-up. The possible negative finding immediately after the intervention was not evident at the delayed follow-up.

  5. It was not possible to draw conclusions about the impact of the intervention on further education uptake, police arrest records, or NEET status because data access and other issues precluded analyses of these outcomes.


  1. Updated: 18th July, 2019

    Printable project summary

    1 MB pdf - EEF-engage-in-education.pdf

  2. Updated: 18th July, 2019

    Evaluation report

    1 MB pdf - Engage_in_Education.pdf

  3. Updated: 8th February, 2016

    Project Protocol

    662 KB pdf - EEF_Project_Protocol_EngageInEducation.pdf

Full project description

keyboard_arrow_down