Explore the evidence
5 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
outcome class
Diagnose what a child already knows: teachers cut 40–50% of curriculum for high-ability children and achievement ROSE. The payoff is skipping, not monitoring.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: medium16/1625/48connected:Does educational technology raise Feedback and formative assessmentMastery learning (teach → test → r
Placement and mastery diagnosis — deciding what to teach next from evidence of current skill · assessment · ages 5–18 · structure
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
Classroom order is causally worth a great deal — one disruptive peer costs classmates 3% of adult earnings — yet no branded behaviour programme reliably delivers it and exclusion makes things worse.
mixedconf: mediumgc: low25/2536/48connected:Talent and trainabilityCan executive function be trained,Should a school buy a social and eAre self-control and grit teachabl
How should a school run its classrooms and its discipline system? · behavior · ages 4–18 · structure
What parents are asked to DO is the whole effect: tutoring a skill d≈1.15, listening to reading 0.51, reading aloud ~0.18 — same parent, same child. All deflate under better designs.
mixedconf: mediumgc: medium33/3336/48connected:Homeschool socialisationDoes homeschooling raise achievemeThe early home environmentTutoring
The parent as instructor — what survives when the person teaching is the person who raised the child · homeschool · ages 4–18 · method
Trust the composite; distrust the breakdown. Subtest strengths-and-weaknesses replicate at chance on retest, and most of what people read off a score report is noise.
mixedconf: mediumgc: low21/2124/48
What a standardized achievement score does and does not license · assessment · ages 5–18 · structure
Not yet assessed for this question · 20
- Acceleration and gifted programs — the label vs the content
- Class-size reduction
- Curriculum choice as a school-level lever
- Deliberate practice and the 10,000-hour rule
- Explicit instruction vs discovery/inquiry — how much guidance?
- Fadeout — why early gains disappear, and what actually persists
- Feedback and formative assessment
- Ability grouping and tracking — four practices, four verdicts
- Homeschool socialisation — the most-asked question, and the least answerable one
- Interleaving (mixing problem types vs blocking)
- Mastery learning (teach → test → reteach to criterion → advance)
- Preschool at scale — Head Start, state pre-K, and what universal provision delivers
- Perry Preschool and Abecedarian — what the famous studies actually establish
- Retrieval practice (the testing effect)
- School spending, charters, and what school-level choices actually move outcomes
- School starting age, relative age, and academic redshirting
- Spaced (distributed) practice
- Teacher quality — selection over credentials and workshops
- Tutoring — the honest effect, the Bloom 2-sigma myth, and what survives scale
- Worked examples (studying solutions vs solving problems)
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.