4.2.1.2.1: Logistical Factors:
a) Accessibility
Teacher D reported that the programme was accessible and easy to implement.
“Well it was quite easy to set up and do, you just went ahead” (LN293) and “I suppose the advantages are they can do it independently and at their own level and at their own pace” (LN330-331).
Teacher C also thought that the programme was accessible as it was not expensive, she commented, “It wasn’t that expensive and you could start with a small number I thought it’s worth a go” (LN92-93).
b) Fits within the school context
Teacher C said that COGMED was easy to use within a school context. The teacher reported
“It’s really easy to fit in your day, so even if you had a Christmas show practice or something that disrupted when you would normally deliver COGMED it wouldn’t matter. It's so easy to pick up and do, so nothing gets in the way of it happening really” (LN229-231).
Teacher D reported that the best time of year to deliver the programme is after Christmas, whereas Teacher A suggested that the autumn term is the most appropriate term to deliver the programme.
4.2.1.2.2: Design and content
Features of the design and programme content of COGMED were described as facilitators.
91
a) Computerised
COGMED is a computerised programme and this was considered to be a facilitative factor. Three of the teachers reported that the pupils liked that the programme could be accessed on an Ipad. It was mentioned that COGMED was given to the Year 6 pupils once the school had purchased a laptop for the teacher to log onto the system. Teacher C said that she liked that COGMED was a computerised programme and did not require much adult intervention. She also discussed that the graphics on COGMED were visually appealing and she then compared them to the computerised literacy intervention IDL.
“I think that they really enjoy being on the computers...This is a real motivator, even I mean IDL the other one we use isn’t like COGMED, COGMED’s graphics are lovely for children IDL looks so boring but they love it because it’s on the laptop” (LN347-350).
Additionally Teacher A said that she also thought that by COGMED being computerised it was appealing to the pupils, particularly to the boys who participated in the programme. Teacher D also said that one of the pupils liked using an ipad “he didn’t want to work.... they enjoyed it just because they were on an ipad” (LN548).
Teacher C liked that COGMED was a computerised programme also because the staff could deliver the intervention simultaneously to more than one pupil. She reported:
“To take them out of class and do it 1 to 1 we just couldn’t do it so to be able to have six sat on ipads in one room in the school with one TA it seemed like we would be able to help more children” (LN109-112).
“Yeh so to help six children in 15 minutes it’s as easy as picking up an ipad and having a go on a thing, we haven’t really got much option” (LN257-258).
Teacher C also discussed that a teacher would not need a high level of knowledge of ICT. “I did like the design and as someone that is not ICT confident I felt that it was easy to use” (LN259-260).
Teacher D also liked the concept that COGMED is computerised. It may be suggested that Teacher D, Teacher C and Teacher A seemed to like that COGMED was on a computer
92 so it didn’t place additional demands on adult time. As an example Teacher D said “That was really good that side of it cause they are actually doing it, all on their own its theirs” (LN170).
b) Programme support
i) Pupils
It was noted by Teacher A that u1656:
“Never had to ask for help when he was undertaking COGMED and he was able to request COGMED programme to repeat any instructions and was able to complete half an hour on the programme without any issues” (LN8-12).
Teacher A said that u1656 was the Year 5 pupil who made the most progress according to the COGMED monitoring system.
Teacher A reported that the programme would help the pupils by repeating the instruction, “Erm well the instructions, they just repeat what they have to do” (LN23).
ii) Teachers
Teacher C reported the programme is designed so that it is simple to use, and that staff do not need additional support
“It’s pretty simple to use and I don’t feel you need any additional support, the Teaching Assistant who’s overseeing the implementation of it, she’s erm did some online training. I had training at the SENCO forum, but it’s pretty simple to use” (LN188-190).
c) Integrated monitoring system
Teacher C liked that COGMED gives a numerical score at the start and at the end of the programme. She also said;
“I like the fact that there would be quantifiable data to show an improvement, so that I could justify why I had spent money on it, why I am using it, so after this small group. I liked the fact that if it worked for them and I got it for more children there would be data from the start and data from the end”(LN95-98).
93
d) Reward at end of COGMED
Teacher D talked about how the pupils got a reward at the end of every completed session on COGMED and that this was a facilitative factor,
“The games they got at the end of it when they’d finished it... so there’s a little incentive” (LN172-173) and “Every now and then they got a game, they were all games really” (LN550-551).
4.2.2: Barriers
The theme of Barriers has two sub themes of Pupil Attributes and Programme Factors and each sub theme has two underlying themes. The thematic map (figure I) below shows the teachers’ views on the Barriers.
Figure I:
Pupil Attributes
Pupil Characteristics Pupil engagementProgramme
Factors
Knowing which pupils to select Design/ ContentBarriers
94