Explore the evidence
3 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
group / setting
cost
outcome class
Explicit code teaching beats little-or-no-phonics for word reading — largest in K-1 and at-risk readers; near-null for comprehension and past grade 3. The whole-language contrast is real but the smallest measured.
strong supportconf: highgc: low18/1836/48connected:Does teaching a growth mindset raiDoes homeschooling raise achievemePhonemic awareness training (and wReading-comprehension strategy ins+3
Systematic/explicit phonics vs whole language and balanced literacy · reading · ages 4–9
The 10,000-hour rule is dead: practice explains ~14% of performance variance, is itself heritable, and identical twins 20,000 hours apart didn't differ. Necessary, insufficient.
mixedconf: highgc: mediumDeliberate practice and the 10,000-hour rule · deliberate-practice · ages 6–18 · method
Teaching movement teaches movement: the skills improve, but transfer to cognition, achievement, or lifelong activity is near zero in the best trials.
no effectconf: highgc: medium7/710/48connected:Does arts education raise academicPhysical activity as an inputDoes teaching grammar improve chilDoes handwriting and transcription+5
Does teaching movement transfer to cognition, achievement, or lifelong activity? · physical-development · ages 4–18
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.