Explore the evidence
4 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
layer
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
outcome class
Timed retrieval practice builds arithmetic automaticity — beating identical untimed tutoring head-to-head — and the anti-timed-test harm claims have no causal evidence.
strong supportconf: highgc: low7/711/48connected:Does homeschooling raise achievemeSpaced (distributed) practiceWord problems, schema instruction,
Math-fact fluency and timed practice (and the anti-timed-test claims) · math · ages 5–12
Manipulatives help when bland, guided, and aged ~7–11 — a guided-representation effect, not 'hands-on learning.' Rich, toy-like objects hurt transfer.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low3/36/48
Manipulatives and concrete-representational-abstract (CRA) sequences · math · ages 5–14
Diagnose what a child already knows: teachers cut 40–50% of curriculum for high-ability children and achievement ROSE. The payoff is skipping, not monitoring.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: medium16/1625/48connected:Does educational technology raise Feedback and formative assessmentMastery learning (teach → test → r
Placement and mastery diagnosis — deciding what to teach next from evidence of current skill · assessment · ages 5–18 · structure
Coaching buys ~0.25 SD of score and has for 42 years — a fraction of what's advertised — and none of it is ability. The score moves; the construct doesn't.
mixedconf: mediumgc: medium20/2036/48
Test preparation — does coaching raise scores, and does a raised score mean raised ability? · assessment · ages 5–18 · structure
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.