Home · Sources · WRITE-006

Calderdale Excellence Partnership: IPEELL. Evaluation report and executive summary

Authors: Torgerson, C. J.; Ainsworth, H.; Bell, K.; Elliott, L.; Fountain, I.; Gascoine, L.; Hewitt, C. E.; Kasim, A.; Kokotsaki, D.; Torgerson, D. J. · Year: 2018 · Tier: RCT · DOI/URL: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/ipeell (no DOI; EEF evaluation report, November 2018)

Primary school (grades 1–6) Lower secondary (grades 7–9) Metacognition and self-regulation Reading and writing

Links to claims

Limits (1)

Claim	Basis
C19	Large school-randomised effectiveness trial (84 English primary schools) of IPEELL, a Self-Regulated Strategy Development writing programme with cascade-trained teachers: writing g = -0.09 after one year and 0.11 after two (neither significant); after two years KS2 reading -0.17, maths -0.30, spelling/grammar -0.28 (all significant). End-of-programme outcomes, no follow-up. C19 weakened 2026-11-15. Full text read.

Claim

Basis

C19

Large school-randomised effectiveness trial (84 English primary schools) of IPEELL, a Self-Regulated Strategy Development writing programme with cascade-trained teachers: writing g = -0.09 after one year and 0.11 after two (neither significant); after two years KS2 reading -0.17, maths -0.30, spelling/grammar -0.28 (all significant). End-of-programme outcomes, no follow-up. C19 weakened 2026-11-15. Full text read.

Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.

Source note

Syntes: Torgerson et al. (2018) — a scaled-up self-regulated writing programme (IPEELL/SRSD) did not raise writing and lowered other KS2 results

Källa: EEF evaluation report, November 2018 (https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/ipeell)

Verified content

[full text] Two pragmatic cluster RCTs in one evaluation; 84 primary schools in Leeds and Lincolnshire randomised 1:1 (stratified by size, FSM, area, mixed classes); FSM 33.4% vs 14.5% nationally; 2015–2017 (pp. 4, 6, 11).
[full text] Intervention: IPEELL (Introduction, Point, Explain, Ending, Links, Language), adapted from Self-Regulated Strategy Development: six stages of instruction and four self-regulation strategies including self-monitoring and goal setting; plus 'memorable experiences' as writing stimuli. Teachers trained one day by newly recruited trainers (train-the-trainers), with a manual and networking meetings (pp. 6–8).
[full text] Trial 1 (one year, Year 6): KS2 writing (teacher-assessed, ordinal) g = −0.09 (−0.34 to 0.15), n = 2,465; KS2 reading −0.23 (−0.43 to −0.04); maths −0.22 (−0.47 to 0.04); spelling, punctuation and grammar −0.22 (−0.46 to 0.01) (Table 1 p. 5; Table 11 p. 33).
[full text] Trial 2 (two years, Years 5–6): independently administered (NFER, blinded) and blind-marked writing test, June 2017, g = 0.11 (−0.13 to 0.34), n = 2,196 (78 of 83 schools; about 20% missing); FSM 0.14 (−0.14 to 0.41); low prior attainers 0.26 (−0.01 to 0.53); higher attainers 0.06; KS2 reading −0.17 (−0.33 to −0.01), maths −0.30 (−0.53 to −0.07; the text on p. 32 prints the upper limit as −0.02), spelling, punctuation and grammar −0.28 (−0.49 to −0.06), KS2 writing −0.04 (−0.25 to 0.17) (Tables 1, 10, 11).
[full text] EEF security: very high (Trial 1), high (Trial 2). Implementation: spring 2016, 14.3% very good, 45.2% good, 35.3% satisfactory, 4.9% unsatisfactory; exploratory CACE (good implementation) Trial 2 0.19 (−0.23 to 0.60); very good implementers 0.30 (−0.08 to 0.69) (pp. 35–36).
[full text] The evaluators attribute the gap with the efficacy trial (Torgerson et al. 2014, effect size about 0.75, low attainers, Years 6–7, developer-delivered training) to inexperienced trainers, different year groups and whole-cohort delivery; they suggest curriculum time may have moved from other subjects to writing (pp. 4–5).

Limits

[full text] Outcomes at the end of the programme; no follow-up after it ended. Trial 1's KS2 writing is teacher-assessed in three categories.
[assessment] One programme, one subject (writing), English primary schools; bundled with memorable experiences.

Role for C19

[assessment] Narrowed C19 (2026-11-15): the claim's gain is shown in research studies; in this large scaled-up trial it did not appear and other KS2 results fell. The kill-condition (follow-up gain gone) was not tested.

Added 2026-11-15 by the project (nightly attack run). [full text] = read in the full report; [assessment] = the project's own assessment.

Metadata as recorded

ID: WRITE-006
Tier: RCT
Titel: Calderdale Excellence Partnership: IPEELL. Evaluation report and executive summary
Författare: Torgerson, C. J.; Ainsworth, H.; Bell, K.; Elliott, L.; Fountain, I.; Gascoine, L.; Hewitt, C. E.; Kasim, A.; Kokotsaki, D.; Torgerson, D. J.
År: 2018
Källa/DOI: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/ipeell (no DOI; EEF evaluation report, November 2018)
Tidskrift: Education Endowment Foundation evaluation report (independent evaluators: Durham University and University of York)
Status: in the library since 2026-11-15 (WRITE-006; nightly attacks, C19 weakened)
Åldersgrupp: grundskola-lag;grundskola-hog
Teman: metakognition-och-sjalvreglering;lasning-och-skrivande
Verifierad: report PDF from the EEF project page (title, evaluators, date November 2018) checked 2026-11-15
Hämtad: 2026-11-15
Paywall: free (EEF report)

The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.