Exploratory ANCOVA controlling for mastery probability favored the adaptive condition, but is not interpretable as a causal treatment effect¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr3·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-19 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 i3 When mastery probability was added as a covariate, the adaptive condition showed higher adjusted posttest performance (d = 0.46), though the authors caution against causal interpretation. → Sibley 2026
Evidence¶
Sibley 2026¶
Sibley, L., Berner, T., & Schmalfeldt, T. (2026). Effectiveness of adaptive versus non-adaptive intelligent tutoring systems in early primary mathematics. Computers and Education Open 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100420
q3 · i3 · causal · r3
Exploratory ANCOVA of posttest on condition with prior knowledge and mastery probability as covariates in the N = 132 experiment; mastery probability itself significantly predicted posttest (F(1, 122) = 51.83, p < .001, η² = .30). The article prints d = 0.46 for the adjusted condition difference.
"Adjusted marginal means indicated higher posttest performance in the adaptive condition (M = 0.12, SE = 0.07) than in the non-adaptive condition (M = −0.12, SE = 0.07), t(122) = 2.33, p = .022, d = 0.46."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Intelligent tutoring systems improve achievement over non-individualised instruction — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Objective learning gains did not differ significantly by condition in the primary ANCOVA, but KBD showed a significant positive effect on learning gains in exploratory regressions accounting for learner covariates — related
- Adaptive spaced retrieval practice produced higher end-of-semester posttest performance than learner-directed AI study, but fixed spaced retrieval did not significantly outperform learner-directed study — related
- Students in the non-adaptive condition reached significantly higher average mastery probabilities than students in the adaptive condition — related
- Adaptive task difficulty in an ITS did not improve second-graders' mathematics posttest performance compared with an identical non-adaptive ITS — reports the opposite
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
mastery-probability-covariate-ancova-favors-adaptive |
title |
Exploratory ANCOVA controlling for mastery probability favored the adaptive condition, but is not interpretable as a causal treatment effect |
description |
Exploratory ANCOVA controlling for mastery probability favored the adaptive condition, but is not interpretable as a causal treatment effect |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
source_checked |
2026-10-19 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-12 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — sibley-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.