The Evidence on Teaching

Explore the evidence

7 of 88 decisions · clear everything

Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
evidencealldrop DA–BA only
evaluatoranyno dev-ledindependent
durabilityanyfollow-up≥1yr≥2yr
what are these? →
sortconfidencerobustfragileA–Z
domain
verdict
confidence
layer
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
cost
outcome class

Physical capacity is about as heritable as cognitive ability (~60%, no shared environment). Whether trainability is a stable trait remains unproven — the skeptics are winning.

strong supportconf: highgc: low
14/1436/48connected:How should a school run its classrDoes working-memory or brain trainCan executive function be trained,Does teaching a growth mindset rai+4

Talent and trainability — what is heritable, and what that does not license · talent · ages 4–18 · input

Feedback on the task helps modestly; feedback on the person backfires — a stable third of measured effects reverse. The famous 0.4–0.7 number has no computed source.

mixedconf: highgc: low
18/1821/48connected:Retrieval practice (the testing efDoes teaching music produce musicaPlacement and mastery diagnosis

Feedback and formative assessment · feedback · ages 5–18 · method

A missed day costs little (~0.005 SD); interventions reliably buy days back cheaply, but nobody has shown the recovered days move achievement.

mixedconf: mediumgc: medium
14/1439/48

Chronic absenteeism — does raising attendance raise achievement? · time · ages 4–18 · input

Sort by what the software replaces: adaptive drill inside the school day buys +0.05-0.20 SD; a device, a connection or the teacher buys zero to negative; LLM tutors have no usable evidence at all.

mixedconf: mediumgc: low
53/5339/48connected:Placement and mastery diagnosisMastery learning (teach → test → rTutoringClass-size reduction

Does educational technology raise learning — CAI, adaptive software, devices, screens, and AI tutors? · edtech · ages 5–18 · structure

Near-zero in primary and almost entirely correlational in secondary. The causal base is three small trials; what the homework IS beats how much of it there is.

mixedconf: mediumgc: medium
16/1629/48

Homework — effects by age and by dosage · homework · ages 5–18 · structure

Classroom order is causally worth a great deal — one disruptive peer costs classmates 3% of adult earnings — yet no branded behaviour programme reliably delivers it and exclusion makes things worse.

mixedconf: mediumgc: low
25/2536/48connected:Talent and trainabilityCan executive function be trained,Should a school buy a social and eAre self-control and grit teachabl

How should a school run its classrooms and its discipline system? · behavior · ages 4–18 · structure

Taking time away hurts measurably; adding it back buys almost nothing. The return per hour is ~0.02-0.03 SD, concave, and near zero in disorderly classrooms.

mixedconf: mediumgc: low
23/2338/48

Length of the school day and year, time-on-task, extended time, and summer · time · ages 4–18 · structure

The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.