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
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
cost
outcome class
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 · 9
- Fadeout — why early gains disappear, and what actually persists
- Math-fact fluency and timed practice (and the anti-timed-test claims)
- Should Gardner's multiple intelligences be used as a basis for instruction?
- Systematic/explicit phonics vs whole language and balanced literacy
- Retrieval practice (the testing effect)
- Spaced (distributed) practice
- Talent and trainability — what is heritable, and what that does not license
- Teacher quality — selection over credentials and workshops
- Tutoring — the honest effect, the Bloom 2-sigma myth, and what survives scale
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.