Summer schools

Moderate impact for moderate cost based on limited evidence.
The cost estimates in the Toolkits are based on the average cost of delivering the interventions.
Implementation cost
This rating provides an overall estimate of the robustness of the evidence, to help support professional decision-making in schools.
Evidence strength
The cost estimates in the Toolkits are based on the average cost of delivering the interventions.
Number of studies
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.
Impact (months)

What is it?​

Behaviour interventions seek to improve attainment by reducing challenging behaviour. This entry covers interventions aimed at reducing a variety of behaviours, from low-level disruption to aggression, violence, bullying, substance abuse and general anti-social activities. The interventions themselves can be split into three broad categories:

  1. approaches to developing a positive school ethos or improving discipline across the whole school which also aim to support greater engagement in learning;
  2. universal programmes which seek to improve behaviour and generally take place in the classroom; and
  3. more specialised programmes which are targeted at students with specific behavioural issues.

Other approaches, such as Parental engagement and Social and emotional learning programmes, are often associated with reported improvements in school ethos or discipline, but are not included in this summary, which is limited to interventions that focus directly on behaviour.

How effective is it?

Evidence suggests that, on average, behaviour interventions can produce moderate improvements in academic performance along with a decrease in problematic behaviours. However, estimated benefits vary widely across the categories of programme described above. Impacts are larger for targeted interventions matched to specific students with particular needs or behavioural issues than for universal interventions or whole school strategies. School-level behaviour approaches are often related to improvements in attainment, but there is a lack of evidence to show that the improvements are actually caused by the behaviour interventions, rather than other school interventions happening the same time. Parental and community involvement programmes are often associated with reported improvements in school ethos or discipline and so are worth considering as alternatives to direct behaviour interventions.

Approaches such as improving teachers’ behaviour management and pupils’ cognitive and social skills seem to be equally effective.

The majority of studies report higher impact with older pupils. There is some anecdotal evidence about the benefits of reducing problematic behaviour of disruptive pupils on the attainment of their classmates, but this is an understudied dimension in evaluations of behaviour programmes.

How secure is the evidence?

Overall, it is clear that reducing challenging behaviour in schools can have a direct and lasting effect on pupils’ learning. This is based on a number of meta-analyses that review robust studies of interventions in schools.

Some caution is needed in interpreting the headline finding as the majority of the meta-analyses of behaviour interventions focus on pupils diagnosed with specific emotional or behavioural disorders, not on low-level classroom disruption. Further research is needed to investigate links between universal approaches to improving general classroom behaviour and better learning outcomes.

One meta-analysis of an anger management intervention shows a positive effect on behaviour but an overall negative effect on learning. This implies that careful targeting and evaluation is important, and demonstrates that it is possible to reduce problematic behaviour without improving learning.

What are the costs?

Costs will be highly dependent on the type of intervention. Teacher-led behavioural interventions in the classroom are the least expensive (the only cost is likely to be that of relevant continuing professional development for the teachers) but the also least effective. One to one support is more expensive but more effective. The cost rating presented here relates to the cost of the more intensive interventions. Overall, costs are estimated as moderate.

What should I consider?

Before you implement this strategy in your learning environment, consider the following:

  1. Targeted interventions for those diagnosed or at risk of emotional or behavioural disorders produce the greatest effects.

  2. Programmes of two to six months seem to produce more long-lasting results.

  3. The wide variation in impact suggests that schools should look for programmes with a proven track record of impact.

  4. Have you considered what training and professional development is required for any programmes you plan to adopt?

  5. Have you explored how to involve parents or communities in behaviour programmes? This appears to increase impact.




Technical Appendix




Miembros fundadores