6 Comments
User's avatar
Priya Mathew Badger's avatar

Wow - the egregious error should have been caught by those reporting out on their results too. Thanks for digging into this. Selection bias was my first thought so wild that not only are they 99% coming in but the growth isn’t even real. The amazing thing is edtech like differentiated learning apps has been proved to work if the measure is as simple as NWEA test scores. I think the real question is whether that’s the right rubric for growth anymore!

Luke Shepard's avatar

The crazy part is I emailed them last summer and spoke with their PR lead and explained the error. So they know about it. Yet, it still stands.

Adam Lupu's avatar

While I agree they should hire an external researcher (though only if they could be impartial)… I think they lost my business when they said it was 55k per child. We already pay 30k in Evanston whether we want to or not. So that would be 85k for an education I could deliver myself for around 100/month in token spend.

Luke Shepard's avatar

Yeah it’s a high price private school - similar in cost to Latin or UChicago Lab.

That’s fine, but doesn’t mean the approach generalizes to other schools. They pay their guides >$100k a year, on top of a huge investment in the software and other staff.

Adam Lupu's avatar

Well we could always figure out what could be working and then make it available for less and tackle the problems of generalizing use in collaboration with public school leaders, teachers, parents, and students.