DynEd software produces significant positive effects on some English subtests compared to teacher-only instruction in the first year¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? In a randomized trial, DynEd showed significant positive effects versus control on picture vocabulary and understanding directions at the end of year one. → 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
Difference-in-difference estimates from a randomized controlled trial in Alajuela, Costa Rica, using the restricted sample of schools with English teachers (n=249 for DynEd vs. control). Table 4a shows Dynedt coefficients of 0.337 (picture vocabulary) and 0.507*** (understanding directions) at end of year one; the article reports "DynEd has significant positive effects compared to the control group".
"These tables show that DynEd has significant positive effects compared to the control group, while Imagine Learning has no positive effects."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Students using DynEd learned 53% more than control-group students taught by teachers alone — related
- DynEd's effects are greater in the first year of daily use than in the second year of three-day-per-week use — related
- DynEd has a significantly greater effect than Imagine Learning on several subtests in both years — related
- Treatment effects vary by baseline performance and gender: Imagine Learning's effects are lower in low-scoring schools and for low-scoring students, and DynEd's advantage is greater for girls in year two — related
- The type of educational software matters: heterogeneous technology effects are not solely a product of context — a broader claim this one bears on
- Imagine Learning shows no positive effects compared to the control group — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.