Explore the evidence
1 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
- transfer2
- arts1
- character1
- class size1
- curriculum1
- deliberate practice1
- edtech1
- feedback1
- foreign language1
- homeschool1
- mastery1
- music1
- physical development1
- school structure1
- sport1
- talent1
- teachers1
- time1
- tutoring1
- writing1
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
cost
outcome class
Coding instruction teaches coding (d≈0.68) and not thinking: against active controls far transfer is g=0.15, two validated-instrument RCTs found d≈0.00, and a 46-school maths trial found −0.16 to −0.21.
no effectconf: mediumgc: lowDoes learning to code improve general thinking? · transfer · ages 5–16
Not yet assessed for this question · 10
- Algebra timing — acceleration mandates, delay mandates, and readiness-based placement
- Does working-memory or brain training transfer to intelligence and achievement?
- Explicit vs reform/constructivist math instruction
- Interleaving (mixing problem types vs blocking)
- Manipulatives and concrete-representational-abstract (CRA) sequences
- Math curriculum choice — how much does the textbook matter?
- Math-fact fluency and timed practice (and the anti-timed-test claims)
- Retrieval practice (the testing effect)
- Spaced (distributed) practice
- Word problems, schema instruction, and the conceptual-vs-procedural question
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.