The article focuses on estimating effects in nonrandomized studies with two outcome measurement occasions and one predictor variable. Given such a design, the analysis approach can be to include the measurement at the previous time point as a predictor in the regression model (ANCOVA), or to predict the change-score of the outcome variable (CHANGE). Researchers demonstrated that both approaches can result in different conclusions regarding the reported effect. Current recommendations on when to apply which approach are, in part, contradictory. In addition, they lack direct reference to the educational and instructional research contexts, since they do not consider latent variable models in which variables are measured without measurement error. This contribution assists researchers in making decisions regarding their analysis model. Using an underlying hypothetical data-generating model, we identify for which kind of data-generating scenario (i.e., under which assumptions) the defined true effect equals the estimated regression coefficients of the ANCOVA and the CHANGE approach. We give empirical examples from instructional research and discuss which approach is more appropriate, respectively.