Explore the evidence
3 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
cost
outcome class
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
Phonemic awareness transfers to reading only with letters attached: speech-only training peaks near 10 hours and moves reading d=0.19; with print, 0.66.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowPhonemic awareness training (and whether it needs letters) · reading · ages 4–7
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 · 1
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.