Previous analyzes showed that word learning gains were stronger only for English-only students and that, despite the summer loss in the treatment groups and control, the program still had an effect. The quasi-experimental study showed small but significant effects (Lawrence, Crossen, Pare-Blagoev, & Snow, 2015). As part of this study, 28 schools were part of the randomized pathway. The treatment was specified as participating in the word generation program. Again, we see in this particular study that the school itself was randomized to the treatment group rather than to classrooms within schools. Note that this is not a problem, just a limitation. The effect sizes were as follows: Mathematics d=1.13, Science d=0.47, Social Studies d=0.38, English d=0.44, on average with an overall effect size of d= 0.62 (Lawrence et al., 2015). The main concern here is the effect size for English, which is the specific domain they are testing with the Word Generation program and it is reported with an effect size of d = 0.44. Looking at the difference in means between pre-test and post-test, vocabulary was reported with a pre-test mean of 18.57 and a post-test mean of 19.89, the difference is 0.71 (Lawrence et al., 2015). The effect size calculated from the raw scores is 0.17. Traditionally, in psychological research, we want to run sizes ranging from 0.20 = small, 0.50 = medium, and 0.80 = large (Cohen, 1992). According to Lipsey (1998)