In the reviewed RCT, students averaged 21.8 hours of DreamBox usage, below the developer's recommended 90 minutes per week¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Although scheduled for 20 to 40 minutes per day, intervention students averaged 21.8 hours of DreamBox Learning usage over the study, approximately 16 minutes per day. → usage

Evidence¶

usage¶

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, What Works Clearinghouse. (2013, December). Elementary School Mathematics intervention report: DreamBox Learning. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/627

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Descriptive usage data from the Wang and Woodworth (2011) RCT, conducted mid-October through mid-February of the 2010–11 school year: intervention students were scheduled for 20 to 40 minutes per day but "students averaged 21.8 hours of usage over the course of the study."

"usage statistics show that students averaged 21.8 hours of usage over the course of the study, or approximately 16 minutes per day."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Odyssey® Math usage varied across classrooms in the DiLeo (2007) trial, partly because of differential access to technology — related
• DreamBox effects on the Problem Solving, Number Sense, and Statistics and Probability subtests were not statistically significant — related
• DreamBox Learning produced a statistically significant positive effect on MAP overall math scores for K–1 students — related
• Results were more robust for students meeting the usage recommendation of 30 minutes per week over a minimum of 18 weeks — related
• Students used their assigned ed-tech tools far below recommended levels, and usage declined over the summer — related
• Math gains from the CAL program occur in classrooms with at least an average of 35 minutes of practice per week — related
• Edtech tool access per district grew more than 350% between 2019 and 2025, yet most tools are unused or used at low intensity — a broader claim this one bears on