Proficiency-level analyses found no significant differences between program users and non-users in odds of attaining ELPAC proficiency¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Logistic regression odds ratios for Lexia English use were greater than 1 for overall (1.042) and oral (1.065) proficiency but not statistically significant. → Nicholas Feroce 2025

Evidence¶

Nicholas Feroce 2025¶

Nicholas Feroce, Jenny Liu, Rajendra Chattergoon. (2025). Exploring the impact of a CALL tool for emergent bilinguals. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10462-5

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Logistic regression on a binary proficiency outcome (performance level 4, 'well developed') for the full sample. Odds ratios for program use exceeded 1 in the expected direction for overall and oral ELPAC but were non-significant; the article suggests intervention intensity as a possible reason.

"Students who used the CALL program and students who did not were found not to be significantly different in terms of English proficiency, both for the overall ELPAC and subdomains."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• English-Learner Status — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• K-5 English learners who used the Lexia English CALL program scored significantly higher on the overall ELPAC than non-users (0.197 SD) in a 2020-21 district implementation — reports the opposite
• Program use was associated with significant gains on both ELPAC subdomains, with a larger effect for the oral subdomain (0.224 SD) than the written subdomain (0.153 SD) — related