11 research outputs found
The STRIPES Trial - Support to Rural India's Public Education System
Background Performance of primary school students in India lags far below government expectations, and major disparity exists between rural and urban areas. The Naandi Foundation has designed and implemented a programme using community members to deliver after-school academic support for children in over 1,100 schools in five Indian states. Assessments to date suggest that it might have a substantial effect. This trial aims to evaluate the impact of this programme in villages of rural Andhra Pradesh and will compare test scores for children in three arms: a control and two intervention arms. In both intervention arms additional after-school instruction and learning materials will be offered to all eligible children and in one arm girls will also receive an additional 'kit' with a uniform and clothes. Methods/Design The trial is a cluster-randomised controlled trial conducted in conjunction with the CHAMPION trial. In the CHAMPION trial 464 villages were randomised so that half receive health interventions aiming to reduce neonatal mortality. STRIPES will be introduced in those CHAMPION villages which have a public primary school attended by at least 15 students at the time of a baseline test in 2008. 214 villages of the 464 were found to fulfil above criteria, 107 belonging to the control and 107 to the intervention arm of the CHAMPION trial. These latter 107 villages will serve as control villages in the STRIPES trial. A further randomisation will be carried out within the 107 STRIPES intervention villages allocating half to receive an additional kit for girls on the top of the instruction and learning materials. The primary outcome of the trial is a composite maths and language test score. Discussion The study is designed to measure (i) whether the educational intervention affects the exam score of children compared to the control arm, (ii) if the exam scores of girls who receive the additional kit are different from those of girls living in the other STRIPES intervention arm. One of the goals of the STRIPES trial is to provide benefit to the controls of the CHAMPION trial. We will also conduct a cost-benefit analysis in which we calculate the programme cost for 0.1 standard deviation improvement for both intervention arms
The Support to Rural India's Public Education System (STRIPES) trial: a cluster randomised controlled trial of supplementary teaching, learning material and material support.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the STRIPES trial was to assess the effectiveness of providing supplementary, remedial teaching and learning materials (and an additional 'kit' of materials for girls) on a composite of language and mathematics test scores for children in classes two, three and four in public primary schools in villages in the Nagarkurnool division of Andhra Pradesh, India. METHODS: STRIPES was a cluster randomised trial in which 214 villages were allocated either to the supplementary teaching intervention (n = 107) or to serve as controls (n = 107). 54 of the intervention villages were further randomly allocated to receive additional kit for girls. The study was not blinded. Analysis was conducted on the intention to treat principle, allowing for clustering. RESULTS: Composite test scores were significantly higher in the intervention group (107 villages; 2364 children) than in the control group (106 villages; 2014 children) at the end of the trial (mean difference on a percentage scale 15.8; 95% CI 13.1 to 18.6; p<0.001; 0.75 Standard Deviation (SD) difference). Composite test scores were not significantly different in the 54 villages (614 girls) with the additional kits for girls compared to the 53 villages (636 girls) without these kits at the end of the trial (mean difference on a percentage scale 0.5; 95% CI -4.34 to 5.4; p = 0.84). The cost per 0.1 SD increase in composite test score for intervention without kits is Rs. 382.97 (£4.45, 8.94) for the intervention with kits. CONCLUSIONS: A 18 month programme of supplementary remedial teaching and learning materials had a substantial impact on language and mathematics scores of primary school students in rural Andhra Pradesh, yet providing a 'kit' of materials to girls in these villages did not lead to any measured additional benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN69951502
Correction: The Support to Rural India's Public Education System (STRIPES) Trial: A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial of Supplementary Teaching, Learning Material and Material Support
Correction: The Support to Rural India's Public Education System (STRIPES) Trial: A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial of Supplementary Teaching, Learning Material and Material Support
There were multiple errors in the author contributions. The updated author contributions are as follows: Conceived and designed the experiments: AE PBo DE VM CF RL PBh. Performed the experiments: RL PBh. Analyzed the data: VM CF PBo AE DE. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: RL AE PBh DE CF PBo VM. Wrote the paper: RL AE DE CF PBo VM PBh
Costs per village and per child (Rupees, GBP, USD).
*<p><i>Conversion date 23rd October 2012 (1 Indian rupee  = 0.01161 GBP/0.01861 USD).</i></p
End of trial maths and language scores for educational interventions alone vs educational interventions + kits (girls only).
<p>End of trial maths and language scores for educational interventions alone vs educational interventions + kits (girls only).</p
Baseline characteristics for clusters and children.
*<p><i>In main school in village (25 villages had 2 schools and 1 village had 3 schools). **Mean number per village.</i></p
End of trial composite score for educational interventions alone vs educational interventions + kits (girls only).
*<p><i>Interaction between intervention and class p = 0.4.</i></p
End of trial composite scores in intervention vs. control villages.
*<p><i>In one village the test was not carried out at the end of the trial.</i></p>**<p><i>Interaction between intervention and gender p = 0.008.</i></p>§<p><i>Interaction between intervention and baseline class p = 0.3.</i></p>†<p><i>In one village test scores not available at baseline and in another village test scores not available at the end of the trial.</i></p>††<p><i>Interaction between intervention and gender after adjustment for baseline composite score p = 0.2.</i></p
End of trial composite score: intervention vs control – overall and stratified by gender and baseline class.
<p>End of trial composite score: intervention vs control – overall and stratified by gender and baseline class.</p