Achievement-quartile analysis shows the intervention was most effective for students in the 2nd quartile (25th–50th percentiles) of baseline achievement¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 Q2 students demonstrated significantly higher math achievement (p = 0.045; effect size = 0.16); Q1 gains were marginal (p = 0.068; effect size = 0.10); Q3 and Q4 did not differ significantly from comparison peers (p = 0.288 and 0.104). → Feng 2025

Evidence¶

Feng 2025¶

Feng, M., Li, L., Brezack, N., & Schneider, M. (2025). Scaling teachers' professional development for ASSISTments companion report: Implementation analysis of the ASSISTments intervention. WestEd. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED677784

q2 · i1 · causal · r2

Quartile analysis of the quasi-experimental sample splitting students into four baseline MAP Growth quartiles. Only Q2 reached significance (p = 0.045, effect size = 0.16); the article concludes the intervention "was most effective for students in the 2nd quartile."

"Students in Q1 ended the year with math scores marginally higher than those in the comparison group (p = 0.068; effect size = 0.10). Students in Q2 demonstrated significantly higher math achievement (p = 0.045; effect size = 0.16). By contrast, students in Q3 and Q4 did not differ significantly from their peers in the comparison group (p = 0.288 and 0.104, respectively)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Across the full sample, students receiving the ASSISTments intervention performed comparably to their virtual comparison peers on end-of-year MAP Growth — related
• Students with lower baseline performance (below the 50th percentile) showed significantly greater math achievement gains with ASSISTments than matched virtual peers — related
• Rural students in the 2nd baseline achievement quartile significantly outperformed their comparison peers by 1.53 points — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Low-performing students (below the 50th pretest percentile) showed significant improvement with vPLC-augmented ASSISTments — related
• The vPLC-augmented ASSISTments treatment sample comprised 59 teachers and 2,855 students in grades 6-8 from 36 public schools across 24 U.S. states, half in rural areas — related
• Videos were especially beneficial for slower readers, with the largest studying-rate advantages at the lowest percentiles — related
• vPLC-augmented ASSISTments did not significantly improve overall middle school math achievement relative to a virtual comparison group — a broader claim this one bears on