Student Engagement and Improvement

 

The study also examined whether students who engaged more extensively with the intervention tended to demonstrate greater improvement.

 

Across all 56 students, there was a statistically significant positive relationship between the number of terms practiced and percentage improvement.

Pearson correlation: r = .297
Statistical significance: p = .026

​

In practical terms, students who practiced more terms tended, on average, to demonstrate larger percentage gains. A simple regression analysis estimated that every additional 100 terms practiced was associated with approximately 5.9 additional percentage points of improvement.

​

The relationship explained approximately 8.8% of the variation in percentage improvement.

This suggests that engagement may be one factor associated with stronger student outcomes.

​

Results for the Most Highly Engaged Students

 

The pattern was particularly notable among the students who practiced the greatest number of terms. The top 10% most engaged students (as demonstrated by time spent on the platform) achieved:

​​

• Average Test 1 score: 66.7

• Average Test 2 score: 77.8

• Average raw score improvement: +11.2 points

​

When percentage improvement was calculated separately for each student and then averaged, the mean individual improvement was 19.3%.

​

These results suggest that students with particularly high levels of engagement may experience stronger gains. Because this subgroup was limited in size, the finding should be considered descriptive and would benefit from confirmation in a larger sample.

​

Methodology and Statistical Interpretation

 

The analysis used paired student data, meaning each student's post-intervention score was compared directly with that same student's pre-intervention score. Paired-sample statistical tests were used to determine whether the observed changes were greater than would reasonably be expected through random variation.

​

For the combined sample:

 t(55) = 5.77
p < .001
95% confidence interval: +3.60 to +7.43 points

 

Because individual score changes were not perfectly normally distributed, a nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test was also conducted.

​

That analysis produced the same overall conclusion:

 p < .001

 

This strengthens confidence that the overall improvement was not dependent on a single statistical assumption. The relationship between terms practiced and percentage improvement was assessed using correlation and regression analysis. The Pearson correlation was statistically significant:r = .297, p = .026

​

​

Considerations for School Board Decision-Making

 

The study provides encouraging preliminary evidence that the intervention is associated with improved student assessment performance. The strongest finding is the overall pre- to post-intervention change. Students improved by an average of 5.52 points (6.8% improvement), and more than three-quarters of participating students improved individually.

​

Statistically significant gains were independently observed in grades 1, 2 and 3, and the Special Education group also recorded a positive average gain, although its sample size was too small for meaningful statistical inference.

​

Engagement May Be an Important Implementation Factor

 

The study also provides evidence that student engagement may matter.

Students who practiced more terms tended to demonstrate greater percentage improvement, and the most highly engaged students showed particularly strong gains.

​

The top 10% of students by terms practiced achieved an average improvement of 19.3%. This suggests that schools implementing the program may want to place emphasis on strategies that encourage:

 • Consistent, regular student participation
• Sufficient opportunities for students to complete terms
• Monitoring of student engagement throughout implementation

​

Important Limitations

​

The study included 56 students, which provides useful preliminary evidence but is still a relatively small sample.The Special Education group included only three students. The study did not include an untreated comparison or control group. As a result, the data demonstrate that student scores increased following the intervention, but they cannot establish that the intervention alone caused the entire improvement. The available data do not indicate whether the observed gains were retained over a longer period.

​

Further evaluation across additional schools, grade levels, student populations, and implementation settings would provide stronger evidence regarding how consistently the results can be replicated. For these reasons, the findings are best viewed as promising evidence from an initial implementation rather than a definitive controlled evaluation.

​

Conclusion

 

Based on the available data, the intervention was associated with consistent and statistically meaningful improvements in student performance. Positive average gains were observed across all four participating groups, with statistically significant improvement in Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, and the combined student population.

​

Across all 56 students:

• Average percent improvement: 6.8%

• Students who improved: 77%

• Overall statistical significance: p < .001

• Effect size: Cohen's dz = 0.77

 

Higher levels of student practice were also associated with greater percentage improvement across the full sample. The top 10% most highly engaged students achieved an average improvement of 19.3%.

​

For school boards considering English Islands, these findings provide encouraging evidence that the program may serve as an effective instructional or supplemental learning tool.

The results suggest that English Islands can be associated with meaningful improvements in student assessment performance, particularly when students engage consistently with the program.

​

Based on the evidence available, schools may wish to consider English Islands through a pilot or phased implementation, while continuing to measure:

 • Pre- and post-intervention achievement
• Student engagement and terms practiced
• Outcomes across grade levels and populations