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
Your situation · from the applicability layer — absence means “not yet assessed,” never “doesn’t apply”
group / setting
cost
outcome class
Group within classes or across grades by subject: modest, nearly free wins. Whole-school streaming does nothing, and early between-school tracking harms the bottom.
moderate supportconf: highgc: lowAbility grouping and tracking — four practices, four verdicts · grouping · ages 5–18 · structure
Accelerate ready kids: they keep pace with older classmates, bank a year, and show no social-emotional harm at 50. The gifted label itself does nothing; the content does.
moderate supportconf: highgc: mediumAcceleration and gifted programs — the label vs the content · grouping · ages 5–18 · structure
Brain training improves the trained task and nothing else: far transfer to intelligence or achievement is 0.001 against active controls.
no effectconf: highgc: low18/1824/48connected:FadeoutTalent and trainabilityDoes learning to code improve geneCan executive function be trained,+1
Does working-memory or brain training transfer to intelligence and achievement? · transfer · ages 4–18 · debunked
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
The URL is the state — any view you build here is a permalink you can hand to someone mid-argument.