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
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
outcome class
Testing yourself beats rereading — robust in real classrooms; honest durable size ~0.1–0.3 SD, biggest after delay, thinnest on transfer.
strong supportconf: highgc: low10/1018/48connected:Feedback and formative assessmentMastery learning (teach → test → rSpaced (distributed) practice
Retrieval practice (the testing effect) · practice · ages 8–18 · method
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
Feedback on the task helps modestly; feedback on the person backfires — a stable third of measured effects reverse. The famous 0.4–0.7 number has no computed source.
mixedconf: highgc: low18/1821/48connected:Retrieval practice (the testing efDoes teaching music produce musicaPlacement and mastery diagnosis
Feedback and formative assessment · feedback · ages 5–18 · method
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
Mixing problem types helps where confusion is the enemy — discriminating similar categories, mixed math practice — and is useless or worse for facts and prose.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowInterleaving (mixing problem types vs blocking) · practice · ages 10–18 · method
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
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
Not yet assessed for this question · 2
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.