Explore the evidence
7 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
layer
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
group / setting
outcome class
Comprehension is knowledge — but vocabulary teaching moves standardized comprehension only d≈0.10. The big content-knowledge bet (Core Knowledge lottery, 0.24) is real and unreplicated.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low5/518/48connected:Curriculum choice as a school-leveShould history be built on contentMath curriculum choiceSystematic/explicit phonics vs who+3
Background knowledge and vocabulary as drivers of reading comprehension · reading · ages 5–14
Phonemic awareness transfers to reading only with letters attached: speech-only training peaks near 10 hours and moves reading d=0.19; with print, 0.66.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowPhonemic awareness training (and whether it needs letters) · reading · ages 4–7
Guided oral reading works, but the ingredient is volume, not repetition: at equal exposure, re-reading has no edge over wide reading.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low4/46/48
Reading fluency — guided repeated oral reading, and whether repetition matters · reading · ages 6–12
Near-zero in primary and almost entirely correlational in secondary. The causal base is three small trials; what the homework IS beats how much of it there is.
mixedconf: mediumgc: medium16/1629/48
Homework — effects by age and by dosage · homework · ages 5–18 · structure
Reading Recovery buys large short-term gains at high cost; the only US long-term estimate is negative. Early 1:1 tutoring works — this model's durability is unproven.
mixedconf: mediumgc: lowReading Recovery and Tier-2 1:1 early-literacy tutoring · reading · ages 5–8
Strategy instruction is a one-time boost, not a trainable skill: six sessions buy what fifty do, and modern at-scale trials are ~null.
mixedconf: mediumgc: low4/46/48connected:Does teaching grammar improve chilSystematic/explicit phonics vs whoBackground knowledge and vocabularDoes teaching spelling work, and w
Reading-comprehension strategy instruction (reciprocal teaching, summarizing, questioning) · reading · ages 8–14
Coding instruction teaches coding (d≈0.68) and not thinking: against active controls far transfer is g=0.15, two validated-instrument RCTs found d≈0.00, and a 46-school maths trial found −0.16 to −0.21.
no effectconf: mediumgc: lowDoes learning to code improve general thinking? · transfer · ages 5–16
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.