Looking back across those “key” messages, I would say two or three sound like common sense. Point two for example, sure everything has an impact and yes some are more effective. To clarify, the report goes on to explain the impact as:
Overall students in the interventions were up to +4 months ahead in learning compared to students in the control groups.
What questions does that make you think of?
The last three “key findings” seem to suggest specific design traits we can pay attention to:
longer programmes, sustained implementation, tailored support for the most disadvantaged students.
Although some of you may argue they are simply characteristics of good design.
I would encourage you to have a look at the link, report and infographic below to dig deeper into the impact they recognise in their analysis. Perhaps use the key ideas as provocations for the design of your own school based programmes.