Explore the evidence
8 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”
Yes, on their own terms: lottery-assigned museum and theatre trips move blind-rated analysis of art, plot knowledge and tolerance by 0.08-0.18 SD weeks later, and a film of the same play moves nothing.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowAre museum and theatre trips worth the day out of school? · arts · ages 8–18
Teaching handwriting works and transfers: freeing the hand frees composition, with gains still present at six months — even taught in groups of three.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: medium8/818/48connected:Does teaching grammar improve chilDoes teaching movement transfer toDoes sentence combining improve wrDoes teaching spelling work, and w+1
Does handwriting and transcription instruction matter, and should young children type instead? · writing · ages 5–12
Teaching coding teaches coding: the one clean school RCT gives g=0.47-0.68. Which approach you pick barely matters, and almost every effect size rests on an instrument the developers built.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowDoes teaching programming actually teach programming — and does the method matter? · computer-science · ages 5–18
Formal spelling instruction works (ES 0.54) and more formal beats less formal — explicit wins again, and it transfers beyond spelling itself.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low7/79/48connected:Does teaching grammar improve chilDoes sentence combining improve wrSystematic/explicit phonics vs whoExplicit instruction vs discovery/+3
Does teaching spelling work, and what does it transfer to? · writing · ages 5–18
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
Content-rich history teaching raises history knowledge (g 0.19-0.46) but not standardized reading in under three years; generic 'historical thinking' has no adequately controlled positive result.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowShould history be built on content knowledge or on generic historical-thinking skills? · history-civics · ages 5–18
No trial has ever varied the sequence of science content and measured the result. The one quasi-experimental test of course order found nothing, and depth-over-breadth is a retrospective survey worth 0.08-0.13 SD.
insufficientconf: mediumgc: medium15/1515/48connected:Background knowledge and vocabularInterleaving (mixing problem typesExplicit instruction vs discovery/Inquiry-based science teaching vs +1
Science content sequencing — coherence, prerequisites, and course order · science · ages 5–18
Nobody has tested it. There is no controlled trial in which art instruction is the input and independently measured art skill is the outcome — the field's core claim is the one it never studied.
insufficientconf: lowgc: medium6/618/48connected:Does arts education raise academicBrain Gym, Whole Brain Teaching, aAre museum and theatre trips worth
Does teaching visual art produce artistic skill? · arts · ages 4–18
Not yet assessed for this question · 16
- Acceleration and gifted programs — the label vs the content
- Background knowledge and vocabulary as drivers of reading comprehension
- Explicit instruction vs discovery/inquiry — how much guidance?
- Explicit vs reform/constructivist math instruction
- 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)
- Does matching instruction to a child's "learning style" improve learning?
- Manipulatives and concrete-representational-abstract (CRA) sequences
- Brain Gym, Whole Brain Teaching, and the smaller classroom brain fads
- Should Gardner's multiple intelligences be used as a basis for instruction?
- Phonemic awareness training (and whether it needs letters)
- Reading fluency — guided repeated oral reading, and whether repetition matters
- Vision — outdoor time against myopia, and screening and correction for achievement
- Word problems, schema instruction, and the conceptual-vs-procedural question
- 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.