A cluster randomized controlled trial of the Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS®) curriculum.
Humphrey, N., Barlow, A., Wigelsworth, M., Lendrum, A., Pert, K., Joyce, C., Stephens, E., Wo, L., Squires, G., Woods, K., Calam, R., Turner, A. (2016). Journal of School Psychology, 58, 73-89.
-
examining1,582Students, grade5
Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) Intervention Report - Supportive Learning Environment Interventions Review Protocol
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) .
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
UK Key Stage 2 Maths |
Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 (Year 6 in UK);
|
28.64 |
28.77 |
No |
-- | |
|
UK Key Stage 2 English |
Promoting Alternative THinking Strategies (PATHS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade: 5 (Year 6 in UK);
|
28.07 |
28.52 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
23% English language learners -
Female: 49%
Male: 51% -
Suburban, Urban
-
Race Asian 12% Black 7% Other or unknown 11% White 70%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 45 mainstream primary schools in 10 districts within the Greater Manchester region of the United Kingdom.
Study sample
At the time of outcome measurement, the 45 schools in the analytic sample included 1,582 grade 5 students, with 823 students in the intervention group and 759 students in the comparison group. Among students in the schools, roughly half were male, 70% were White, 12% were Asian, 7% were Black, 17% were identified as students with disabilities, 31% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, and 23% used English as a second language.
Intervention Group
The PATHS® program is a curriculum that aims to promote emotional and social competencies, and reduce aggression and behavior problems in elementary school-age children. The lessons cover five topics: self-control, emotional literacy, social competence, positive peer relations, or interpersonal problem-solving skills. Students in the intervention group received the PATHS® program for a two-year period. PATHS® lessons occurred during normal class time, typically in the period reserved for personal, social, and health education and lasted approximately 30 to 40 minutes. The study team made surface-level changes to the language and examples in the PATHS® program to make it more relevant for a British sample. This was accomplished by altering vocabulary, photographs, cultural references, or names used in lessons (for example, changing the word principal to headteacher, and the word soccer to football).
Comparison Group
Students assigned to the comparison condition received the "business-as-usual" instruction that was available in their schools, including lessons in personal, social, and health education; the whole-school component of UK’s Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) program; circle time; nurture groups; the UK's National Healthy Schools program at the universal level; and the Targeted Mental Health in Schools program.
Support for implementation
Teachers in schools that implemented the PATHS® program received one full day of initial training with a half-day follow-up four months later, designed to familiarize teachers with the PATHS® curriculum. Certified trainers from the Pennsylvania State University delivered the training. Teachers in schools implementing the PATHS® program also received an implementation guidance manual developed by the research team and ongoing technical support and assistance from three members of the research team, who had also been trained by Pennsylvania State University trainers.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Humphrey, N., Hennessey, A., Lendrum, A., Wigelsworth, M., Turner, A., Panayiotou, M., Joyce, C., Pert, K., Stephens, E., Wo, L., Squires, G., Woods, K., Harrison, M., and Calam, R. (2018). The PATHS curriculum for promoting social and emotional well-being among children aged 7-9 years: a cluster RCT. Public Health Research, 6 (10).
-
Humphrey, Neil; Barlow, Alexandra; Wigelsworth, Michael; Lendrum, Ann; Pert, Kirsty; Joyce, Craig; Stephens, Emma; Wo, Lawrence; Squires, Garry; Woods, Kevin; Calam, Rachel; Harrison, Mark; Turner, Alex; Humphrey, Neil. (2015). Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation.
-
Panayiotou, Margarita; Humphrey, Neil; Hennessey, Alexandra. (2020). Implementation Matters: Using Complier Average Causal Effect Estimation to Determine the Impact of the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) Curriculum on Children's Quality of Life. Journal of Educational Psychology, v112 n2 p236-253.
-
Humphrey, N., Barlow, A., & Lendrum, A. (2018). Quality matters: Implementation moderates student outcomes in the PATHS Curriculum. Prevention Sciences, 19, 197-208.
-
Hennessey, Alexandra; Humphrey, Neil. (2020). Can Social and Emotional Learning Improve Children's Academic Progress? Findings from a Randomised Controlled Trial of the Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS) Curriculum. European Journal of Psychology of Education, v35 n4 p751-774.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).