Only one of seven eligible studies of I CAN Learn® met WWC group design standards, and it met them only with reservations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The WWC identified seven eligible studies; no study met group design standards without reservations, one met them with reservations, and the remaining six did not meet standards. → wwc-research-summary

Evidence¶

wwc-research-summary¶

What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2017, July). Primary Mathematics intervention report: I CAN Learn®. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/676

q2 · i? · review · r3

Review of 40 identified studies: seven fell within the Primary Mathematics scope and were reviewed against group design standards; six did not meet the standards, leaving a single quasi-experimental study (Kerstyn, 2002) as the basis for the effectiveness rating. The extent of evidence for the mathematics achievement domain is rated small.

"None of the seven studies is a randomized controlled trial that meets WWC group design standards without reservations. One study uses a quasi-experimental design that meets WWC group design standards with reservations."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for Core-Plus Mathematics is small: of 17 reviewed studies, only one met WWC standards (with reservations) and 16 did not meet standards or screens — related
• Thirteen of 14 reviewed studies of the program fail WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens, most for lacking comparison-group designs or non-equivalent quasi-experimental groups — related
• Only one of 10 identified studies of InsideTrack© Coaching met WWC group design standards without reservations — related
• The evidence base for the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• The supporting evidence for TEEMSS comes from a quasi-experimental study meeting WWC standards only with reservations — related
• Of 305 studies of Fast ForWord reviewed for adolescent learners, two met WWC evidence standards, six met standards with reservations, and 297 met neither — related
• The evidence base for Everyday Mathematics® on primary mathematics achievement is small: one study of 3,436 students met WWC standards, and 33 of 34 eligible studies did not meet group design standards — related
• The evidence base for summer bridge programs on postsecondary outcomes is small: only one of 31 eligible studies met WWC group design standards — related
• The evidence base for Facing History and Ourselves is limited: only one of eight reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards, and it used a quasi-experimental rather than randomized design — related