Explore the evidence
6 of 88 decisions · clear everything
Survives the gold standardIndependent, durable, rigorousThe debunked shelfCheap winsFor parents at homeFamous numbers, deflatedWhere we admit ignoranceThe terrain
domain
- math5
- reading5
- arts4
- early childhood4
- health4
- science4
- history civics3
- practice3
- writing3
- foreign language2
- grouping2
- homeschool2
- instruction style2
- motor skills2
- time2
- assessment1
- character1
- class size1
- computer science1
- curriculum1
- debunked1
- feedback1
- homework1
- music1
- physical development1
- practical1
- retention1
- school structure1
- sport1
- teachers1
survival prior
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
who's delivering
group / setting
Testing yourself beats rereading — robust in real classrooms; honest durable size ~0.1–0.3 SD, biggest after delay, thinnest on transfer.
strong supportconf: highgc: low10/1018/48connected:Feedback and formative assessmentMastery learning (teach → test → rSpaced (distributed) practice
Retrieval practice (the testing effect) · practice · ages 8–18 · method
Spacing beats massing at equal total time — the most robust finding in learning science. Space repetitions at ~10–20% of how long you need to remember.
strong supportconf: highgc: low7/712/48connected:Interleaving (mixing problem typesMath-fact fluency and timed practiRetrieval practice (the testing ef
Spaced (distributed) practice · practice · ages 6–18 · method
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: medium7/710/48connected: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
Selective CTE high schools raise male graduation 8-10pp and early-career earnings 17-35% on lottery and cutoff designs; test scores, degrees, and every outcome for girls are flat.
moderate supportconf: mediumgc: lowDo career and technical education tracks help students — and which students? · practical · ages 14–18
One systematic review kept 39 studies from 11,771 records; another found 1 RCT among 53. What evidence exists favours interest (+0.12) over attainment (+0.01), and simulations match real apparatus.
mixedconf: mediumgc: lowLaboratory and practical work in school science · science · ages 5–18
No trial has ever varied the sequence of science content and measured the result. The one quasi-experimental test of course order found nothing, and depth-over-breadth is a retrospective survey worth 0.08-0.13 SD.
insufficientconf: mediumgc: medium15/1515/48connected:Background knowledge and vocabularInterleaving (mixing problem typesExplicit instruction vs discovery/Inquiry-based science teaching vs +1
Science content sequencing — coherence, prerequisites, and course order · science · ages 5–18
Not yet assessed for this question · 8
- Algebra timing — acceleration mandates, delay mandates, and readiness-based placement
- Explicit vs reform/constructivist math instruction
- Interleaving (mixing problem types vs blocking)
- Manipulatives and concrete-representational-abstract (CRA) sequences
- Math curriculum choice — how much does the textbook matter?
- Word problems, schema instruction, and the conceptual-vs-procedural question
- Inquiry-based science teaching vs explicit and textbook science teaching
- Science misconceptions and conceptual change — can naive intuitions be taught away?
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.