Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation report and Executive summary

45 schools in Greater Manchester; 1,705 Year 5 pupils (aged 9-10) and 1,631 Year 6 pupils (aged 10-11); two years of implementation, 2012-14

England; primary-school pupils.

The direct test of the SEL achievement claim on externally marked national tests, and it is an EFFICACY trial run under developer-optimised conditions - training was led by Penn State's Evidence-Based Prevention and Intervention Support Centre, teachers received coaching, and materials came from Barnardo's. School dropout was under 20% in Year 5 and ZERO in Year 6. Outcomes are Key Stage 2 SATs for Year 6 and standardised InCAS testing for Year 5. EEF rated security high for Year 6 and moderate-to-high for Year 5.

PATHS did not raise attainment. Year 5 maths +0.026, Year 5 reading -0.029, Year 6 maths -0.025, and Year 6 English -0.106, which EEF translates as minus two months' progress and describes as attributable to the intervention rather than to chance. Free-school-meal subgroup estimates were Year 5 maths -0.036, Year 5 reading +0.017, Year 6 maths +0.016 and Year 6 English +0.120. On average only half the lessons were delivered. EEF's verdict is that the lack of impact can be attributed to the lack of success of the PATHS programme itself, and it notes that the American study underwriting PATHS's reputation had an attrition rate of nearly 50%.

Low. School-level randomisation.

A failed replication of the US PATHS evidence base, conducted under conditions maximally favourable to the programme, with the one secure signal running negative.