Integrating English

High-quality language teaching is foundational to all pupils’ attainment, but is particularly important for learners with English as an Additional Language (EAL). An EEF evidence review (2015) highlighted a lack of evaluated programmes aimed at improving English language and/or literacy skills in children with EAL.

Integrating English adopts a functional approach to the teaching of linguistics and grammar, whereby teachers break down the language used in their specific subject in order to improve the understanding of learners. As part of this approach, teachers highlight the different varieties of genre in a subject, explain the register expected from pupils in their work, use the teaching and learning cycle (where texts are broken down to investigate their subject-specific features), and explore the relationship between spoken and written language. The intervention aimed to support teachers to practically apply these theories, particularly when teaching EAL learners.

school

Cross curriculum

Subject

accessibility

Key Stage 2

Key stage

EEF Summary

Co-funded by the EEF with the Bell Foundation and Unbound Philanthropy as part of our joint EAL funding round, the evaluation aimed to test the impact of an intervention centred on a well-established Australian programme, Language in Learning Across the Curriculum (LiLAC).

Our trial involved 91 schools and 4,762 pupils. The independent evaluation found no evidence that Integrating English improved all pupils’ Key Stage 2 writing outcomes, the measure of attainment chosen for the trial.

This result is rated as moderate-to-high security: 3 out of 5 on the EEF padlock scale.This is because, although the evaluation was well designed, nearly a quarter of pupils who started the trial did not take the final test.

In addition, it is worth noting that, though the trial included a large sub-group analysis of almost 2,000 EAL pupils, there was no evidence that Integrating English improved their writing outcomes, nor were positive outcomes identified for FSM-eligible pupils. However, it should be noted that a limitation in this evaluation was the lack of a subject-specific writing outcome measure. The general writing outcome measure used may not have adequately captured literacy development in specific subjects.

Although the vast majority of teachers interviewed by the evaluator felt that the training was comprehensive and efficient, there was evidence to suggest that key principles were not effectively delivered by teachers. The training could have provided further ongoing support to teachers to remedy this, while parts of the training model could also have been simplified.

The EEF has no further plans to trial the Integrating English programme. 

Research Results

KS2 Writing

-1
Months' Progress
Evidence Strength

KS2 Writing (EAL pupils)

-1
Months' Progress

N/A

KS2 Writing (FSM pupils)

0
Months' Progress

N/A

Were the schools in the trial similar to my school?

  • There were 91 schools located across the country
  • Training was delivered in 5 hub areas, South East, West Midlands, North East, Leicester and Peterborough, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk.
  • 71% of schools in the trial were Good or Outstanding
  • 53% of pupils in the trial schools were EAL learners
  • 44% of pupils in the trial schools were eligible for free school meals in the last 6 years

Could I implement this in my school?

  • Year 5 teachers were trained for 5 days in spring term before designing an action plan and delivering schemes of work in the summer term of Year 5. During this summer term and the following autumn term, Year 6 teachers were trained for 5 days, before designing and delivering schemes of work to the same students, now in Year 6.
  • Teachers were expected to complete readings and practical homework tasks between training days
  • Only a minority of schools (12 from 46) completed the full demands of the programme (including training, creating action plans and schemes of work)
account_circle

Teachers

Delivered by

language

Whole School

Participant group

date_range

2 Years

Intervention length

How much will it cost?

If delivered in geographical hubs, as in this trial, the average cost of the intervention is around £3 per pupil, per year when averaged over three years. Initial costs include training and buying the LiLAC manual, both of which are one off costs in the first year. Schools also need to meet the cost of staff cover for six days per participating teacher (12 days in total), for a Year 5 and Year 6 teacher. There are no ongoing costs associated with delivery. If an individual school wished to deliver the programme in a non-hub based model, due to higher training costs, the programme would cost around £21 per pupil, per year.

£

£3

Cost per pupil

people_outline

4

No. of Teachers/TAs

today

6 Days

Training time per staff member

Evaluation info

Schools

91

Pupils

4762

Key Stage

Key Stage 2

Start date

April 2016

End date

September 2019

Type of trial

Efficacy Trial

Evaluation Conclusions

  1. There is no evidence that Integrating English improved pupils’ KS2 writing outcomes. This result has a moderate to high security rating.

  2. There is no evidence that Integrating English had an impact on the KS2 writing outcomes of pupils receiving free school meals. These results have lower security than the overall findings because of the smaller number of pupils.

  3. There is no evidence that Integrating English improved EAL pupils’ KS2 writing outcomes. Although this was measured through a large subgroup analysis, these results have lower security than the overall findings because of the smaller number of pupils.

  4. The process evaluation indicates that, although teachers responded positively to the training, the CPD model may not have been effective in creating the desired teacher practice change. A simpler model may be more effective.


  1. Updated: 26th September, 2019

    Printable project summary

    1 MB pdf - EEF-integrating-english.pdf

Full project description

keyboard_arrow_down