The Evidence on Teaching

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
evidencealldrop DA–BA only
evaluatoranyno dev-ledindependent
durabilityanyfollow-up≥1yr≥2yr
what are these? →
sortconfidencerobustfragileA–Z
domain
verdict
confidence
layer
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
cost
outcome class

Teacher quality is the largest within-school lever — 1 SD of teacher ≈ 0.10–0.15 SD/yr, worth more than ten fewer students — and credentials predict none of it. Select; don't workshop.

strong supportconf: highgc: low
11/1136/48connected:School spending, charters, and whaClass-size reduction

Teacher quality — selection over credentials and workshops · teachers · ages 4–18 · structure

Group within classes or across grades by subject: modest, nearly free wins. Whole-school streaming does nothing, and early between-school tracking harms the bottom.

moderate supportconf: highgc: low
12/1236/48connected:Do career and technical education

Ability grouping and tracking — four practices, four verdicts · grouping · ages 5–18 · structure

Accelerate ready kids: they keep pace with older classmates, bank a year, and show no social-emotional harm at 50. The gifted label itself does nothing; the content does.

moderate supportconf: highgc: medium
8/833/48connected:Algebra timing

Acceleration and gifted programs — the label vs the content · grouping · ages 5–18 · structure

Curriculum is nearly free, so choosing beats not choosing — but the payoff is avoiding a demonstrated loser, not finding a magic winner. Content is the high-upside bet.

mixedconf: highgc: low
9/927/48connected:Background knowledge and vocabularScience content sequencing

Curriculum choice as a school-level lever · curriculum · ages 4–14 · structure

Mastery learning moves tests of what it taught (~0.25) and barely moves independent measures (~0.05) — and time-to-mastery gaps widen, converting ability differences into time.

mixedconf: highgc: low
6/615/48connected:Does educational technology raise Retrieval practice (the testing efPlacement and mastery diagnosis

Mastery learning (teach → test → reteach to criterion → advance) · mastery · ages 6–18 · method

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: medium
16/1625/48connected: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

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: low
25/2536/48connected: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

Not yet assessed for this question · 1

The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.