RM-CC5 usage metrics correlated positively with achievement, and together accounted for an additional 7.3% of variance in Grade 5 scores beyond prior achievement, though causality and relative contributions could not be inferred¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Usage metrics added 7.3% of explained variance in Grade 5 WVGSA beyond the 66% accounted for by Grade 4 WVGSA (small positive linear relationship); the study was not designed to infer causal mechanisms. → Nicole Shechtman 2019

Evidence¶

Nicole Shechtman 2019¶

Nicole Shechtman, Jeremy Roschelle, Mingyu Feng, Corinne Singleton. (2019). An Efficacy Study of a Digital Core Curriculum for Grade 5 Mathematics. AERA Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419850482

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Exploratory two-level MLM extension with multiply imputed data, adding time logged in, objectives met, problems given, and problem accuracy to the model of Grade 5 WVGSA. Table 4 reports correlations of metrics with Grade 5 WVGSA (e.g., objectives met r = .548, accuracy r = .547, all p < .0001) and the Grade 4–Grade 5 correlation of .798. The article states "it was impossible to tease apart causality."

"Together, these added variables accounted for an additional 7.3% of the variance. Thus, after controlling for prior knowledge, these RM-CC5 usage metrics had a small positive linear relationship with Grade 5 WVGSA."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Assigning schools to use RM-CC5 as their core Grade 5 mathematics curriculum for a full year did not significantly change state assessment achievement compared with business-as-usual schools — related
• Treatment students substantively engaged with RM-CC5 across the school year and all treatment schools met the program's implementation intensity benchmarks, though engagement varied widely between schools and students — related
• No significant differential treatment effects by prior (Grade 4) achievement level or gender; the Grade 4 Level 3 subgroup difference was marginal (p = .053) — related
• The authors interpret the null result as partly reflecting a tension between adaptive mastery learning and curricular coverage: students who master early topics slowly may not reach later topics tested by the state assessment — related
• RM-CC5 treatment teachers shifted toward one-on-one instruction with individual students, while control teachers led more whole-group and small-group instruction — related
• Treatment classrooms used technology far more intensively than control classrooms, whose technology use remained supplemental — related
• Prior cross-sectional between-group research on the platform found a positive usage–test-score relationship but could not rule out unobserved confounding — related
• Longitudinal within-student analysis of a mathematics mastery learning platform replicates positive effects on standardized math test scores — related
• Teacher-student interaction quality may reflect pre-existing student characteristics rather than teacher skill unless prior achievement is accounted for — related