Explore the evidence
2 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
- math6
- reading6
- early childhood5
- debunked3
- health3
- practice3
- grouping2
- instruction style2
- motor skills2
- writing2
- arts1
- assessment1
- class size1
- curriculum1
- deliberate practice1
- feedback1
- foreign language1
- history civics1
- homeschool1
- homework1
- mastery1
- physical development1
- school structure1
- science1
- sport1
- talent1
- teachers1
- time1
- transfer1
- tutoring1
verdict
confidence
layer
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
group / setting
outcome class
Sentence combining improves writing where grammar teaching fails — the same meta-analyses score them +0.50 and −0.32.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low8/89/48connected:Does teaching grammar improve chilDoes teaching movement transfer toDoes handwriting and transcriptionDoes teaching spelling work, and w
Does sentence combining improve writing? · writing · ages 5–18
Capitalisation and punctuation move when directly taught and directly measured, and don't move when embedded in writing programmes. A teachable subject, not a writing lever.
mixedconf: mediumgc: mediumCan capitalisation, punctuation and usage be taught directly as their own subject? · writing · ages 5–18
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.