Good Behaviour Game: evaluation report and executive summary

Abstract

EEF security ratingThese findings have a high security rating (see appendix 11).This was an efficacy trial, which tested whether the intervention worked under developer-led conditions in a number of schools.It was a welldesigned, two-armed randomised controlled trial.The study was well-powered and the pupils in GBG schools were similar to those in the comparison schools in terms of prior attainment.However, the following factor reduced the security of the trial: 19% of the pupils who started the trial were not included the final analysis, because they had moved school or were absent on the day of testing. Key conclusions1. We found no evidence that the GBG improves pupils' reading.This result has a high security rating.2. We found no evidence that the GBG improves pupils' behaviour (specifically, concentration problems, disruptive behaviour, and pro-social behaviour).3. Implementation was variable and in particular, the frequency and duration with which the GBG was played did not reach the levels expected by the developer.One-quarter of schools in the intervention arm ceased implementation before the end of the trial.4. Higher levels of pupil engagement with the game were associated with improved reading, concentration, and disruptive behaviour scores at follow-up.There was no clear evidence that other aspects of implementation (for example, how well or how frequently the game was played) were related to whether pupil outcomes improved.These results were sensitive to changes in how we analysed the data, and so should be interpreted with caution.5. There was tentative evidence that boys identified as at-risk of developing conduct problems at the beginning of the project benefitted from the GBG.For these children, small reductions in concentration problems and disruptive behaviour were observed.