Education Endowment Foundation:Speech Bubbles

Speech Bubbles

London Bubble Theatre Co
Implementation costThe cost estimates in the Toolkits are based on the average cost of delivering the intervention.
Evidence strengthThis rating provides an overall estimate of the robustness of the evidence, to help support professional decision-making in schools.
Impact (months)The impact measure shows the number of additional months of progress made, on average, by children and young people who received the intervention, compared to similar children and young people who did not.
-1
months
Project info

Independent Evaluator

Behavioural Insights Team logo
Behavioural Insights Team
IOE, UCL's Faculty of Education and Society logo
IOE, UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society
Using drama and storytelling to develop pupils’ communication skills.
Pupils: 500 Schools: 26 Grant: £257,310
Key Stage: 1 Duration: 4 year(s) 4 month(s)
Completed September 2021

EEF Summary

This evaluation is part of a round of funding between the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) and the Royal Society of Arts to test the impact of different cultural learning strategies in English schools entitled ​‘Learning about Culture’. These projects have been independently evaluated by a collaboration between the UCL Institute of Education and the Behavioural Insights Team who have also produced an overarching report to draw together learning from all five trials within the round.

An independent review of the Speech Bubbles approach indicated that it had promise to develop pupils’ self-efficacy and communication skills. A comparison group study led by the University of East London also indicated that the approach had promise.

Wider evidence from the EEF toolkit on oral language interventions shows consistently positive effects of on average +5 months’ additional progress over the course of a year. The impact tends to be greatest for younger children and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. A number of studies also show the impact of trained teaching assistants effectively supporting oral language skills and reading outcomes.

The trial was a two-arm individually randomised controlled trial involving 1006 pupils across 26 schools. The independent evaluation found that pupils who received the SB intervention had, on average, lower reading attainment scores (equivalent to one month’s less progress) as compared to children in the control group. Pupils who received Speech Bubbles did not show any substantial difference in oral communication skills as compared to pupils in the control group. These are our best estimates of impact which both have a high security rating of 4 out of 5 on the EEF padlock scale. However, as with any study there is some uncertainty around the result: the possible impact of this programme on both reading attainment and oral communication ranges from three months less progress to positive effects of two additional months of progress.

The evaluation did find that members of the SLT, TAs and drama generally reported feeling positive about the intervention and reported noticing positive changes in pupils’ oral communication skills, self-efficacy, and self-regulation. However, the perceived impacts on pupils’ literacy were limited. 

The EEF has no plans for a further trial of the Speech Bubbles programme.

Evaluation Conclusions

  1. Pupils who received the Speech Bubbles intervention had, on average, lower reading attainment scores (equivalent to one month’s less progress) as compared to children in the control group. Pupils who received Speech Bubbles did not show any substantial difference in oral communication skills as compared to pupils in the control group. These are our best estimates of impact which both have a high security rating. However, as with any study, there is uncertainty around the result: the possible impact of this programme on both reading attainment and oral communication ranges from three months less progress to positive effects of two additional months of progress.
  2. The impact evaluation did not find evidence the Speech Bubbles intervention had any effect on creative self-efficacy or social skills. The intervention did not have a differential impact on reading attainment or oral communication skills by eligibility for free school meals.
  3. Members of the SLT, TAs and drama practitioners in the case study schools generally reported feeling positive about the intervention and reported noticing positive changes in pupils’ oral communication skills, self-efficacy, and self-regulation. However, the perceived impacts on pupils’ literacy were limited.
  4. Overall, fidelity to the delivery model and dosage were high, based on data gathered through interviews, surveys, observations, and delivery records.
  5. The key factors identified that influenced implementation and delivery of the intervention were: (i) the need to have SLT support to secure required resources (e.g., the same room each week); (ii) SB facilitators acting as role models and partners in delivery; and (iii) the characteristics of the pupils and associated group dynamics during the SB sessions.
Outcome/​Group
ImpactThe size of the difference between pupils in this trial and other pupils
SecurityHow confident are we in this result?
Reading attainment (Progress in Reading Assessment: PIRA)
-1
Months' progress
Oral communication (Renfrew Bus Story test: RBS)
0
Months' progress

Were the schools in the trial similar to my school?

  • 1006 pupils across 26 schools were recruited for the study.
  • Schools were located in North West England, South London and East London.
  • 32.9% of pupils in the intervention group were eligible for FSM compared to 35.5% of pupils in the control group.
  • 56.2% of pupils in the intervention group had English as an Additional Language compared to 56.9% of pupils in the control group.
  • Ten schools were rated by Ofsted as outstanding, 13 were rated as good, and one was rated as requiring improvement.

Could I implement this in my school?

  • SB sessions require a resource pack including a narrative stimulus pack and emotional faces stimuli. After each session, the TA and DP reflect on the session and co-plan the activities for the next week. Parents are encouraged to attend two of the sessions, but this is not mandatory.
  • TAs attend an initial training day and a second day with their drama practitioner halfway through the project. TAs are encouraged to attend training each year of implementation.
  • The direct cost to schools for the programme is £3000, but this is often subsidised by additional funding sourced by London Bubble or the regional theatre companies delivering the programme. Programme fees for schools participating in this evaluation were subsided by the EEF and cost £500 per school.

How much will it cost?

The costs to schools of delivering the Speech Bubbles intervention is low: £110 per pupil per year, as averaged over three years. The cumulative cost to schools over a three-year period is £6572. These estimates are based on one TA or teacher being trained per setting and delivering the programme to twenty pupils per year.

Downloads