Education Endowment Foundation

Speech Bubbles

The Speech Bubbles (SB) intervention is a KS1 drama and storytelling intervention aimed at supporting children's communication skills, confidence, and wellbeing. The intervention was targeted at pupils aged 5-7 in Key Stage 1 in primary schools in England, who had been identified by their teachers as having difficulties with or lacking confidence in communicating or having poor attention and listening skills.

The intervention consisted of weekly 45-minute sessions, delivered to two groups of 10 pupils during normal teaching hours for 24 weeks over three school terms. SB is delivered by a drama practitioner (DP), who is recruited and trained by London Bubble, and a teaching assistant (TA) from each delivery school. Each session followed a clear and repeated routine centred around the telling and re-enacting of stories that are told by the children. The sessions included activities that support expressive language, receptive language and turn taking. 

Speech Bubbles

London Bubble Theatre Co

L

Language and literacy

E

Enrichment

Using drama and storytelling to develop pupils’ communication skills.

-1

add close

Project Info

Independent Evaluator

Behavioural Insights, The Institute of Education

Pupils

1006

Schools

26

Grant

£257,310

Themes

L

Language and literacy

E

Enrichment

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.

Research Results

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.