Explore the evidence
2 of 88 decisions · 1 collapse at your settings · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
- math6
- reading6
- writing6
- early childhood5
- science5
- arts4
- character4
- health4
- assessment3
- debunked3
- foreign language3
- history civics3
- homeschool3
- practice3
- grouping2
- instruction style2
- motor skills2
- music2
- practical2
- time2
- transfer2
- behavior1
- class size1
- computer science1
- curriculum1
- deliberate practice1
- edtech1
- feedback1
- homework1
- mastery1
- physical development1
- retention1
- school structure1
- sport1
- talent1
- teachers1
- tutoring1
verdict
layer
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
group / setting
cost
outcome class
Teaching movement teaches movement: the skills improve, but transfer to cognition, achievement, or lifelong activity is near zero in the best trials.
no effectconf: highgc: mediuminsufficient at your settings0/710/48connected:Does arts education raise academicPhysical activity as an inputDoes teaching grammar improve chilDoes handwriting and transcription+5
Does teaching movement transfer to cognition, achievement, or lifelong activity? · physical-development · ages 4–18
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
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.