DynEd's effects are greater in the first year of daily use than in the second year of three-day-per-week use¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? DynEd's treatment effects were larger when students used the software five days a week (year one) than three days a week (year two). → Sarah Humpage and Horacio Álvarez-Marinelli 2014

Evidence¶

Sarah Humpage and Horacio Álvarez-Marinelli 2014¶

Sarah Humpage and Horacio Álvarez-Marinelli. (2014). Teachers’ Helpers: Experimental Evidence from Costa Rica on Computers for English Language Learning. SREE Spring 2014 Conference. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562994

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Comparison of year-one and year-two difference-in-difference estimates in the randomized trial. In Table 4a, Dynedt for understanding directions falls from 0.507** (year one) to 0.306 (year two, not significant), consistent with the article's statement that effects were greater under five-day-per-week use.

"DynEd’s effects are greater in the first year of the study when students work with the software five days a week then in the second year, when they work with the software three days a week."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students using DynEd learned 53% more than control-group students taught by teachers alone — related
• DynEd has a significantly greater effect than Imagine Learning on several subtests in both years — related
• DynEd software produces significant positive effects on some English subtests compared to teacher-only instruction in the first year — related
• Amount of ASR practice (days per week, session length) showed no observable difference in pronunciation improvement — related