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

Brain training improves the trained task and nothing else: far transfer to intelligence or achievement is 0.001 against active controls.

no effectconf: highgc: low
18/1827/48connected: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

Unassisted discovery loses to explicit teaching; well-scaffolded guided discovery beats both. The operative variable is guidance, not ideology.

moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low
13/1315/48connected:Worked examples (studying solutionExplicit vs reform/constructivist Science content sequencingInquiry-based science teaching vs +1

Explicit instruction vs discovery/inquiry — how much guidance? · instruction-style · ages 4–18 · method

Mixing problem types helps where confusion is the enemy — discriminating similar categories, mixed math practice — and is useless or worse for facts and prose.

moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low
7/718/48connected:Spaced (distributed) practiceScience content sequencing

Interleaving (mixing problem types vs blocking) · practice · ages 10–18 · method

Outdoor time prevents myopia from starting (not progressing); screening plus free glasses raises test scores in children who need them. Two claims, both real.

moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low
17/1736/48

Vision — outdoor time against myopia, and screening and correction for achievement · health · ages 4–18 · input

Novices learn faster studying solutions than solving problems — then the effect reverses with expertise. Use worked examples early; fade them.

moderate supportconf: mediumgc: low
6/66/48connected:Explicit instruction vs discovery/Word problems, schema instruction,

Worked examples (studying solutions vs solving problems) · instruction-style · ages 10–18 · method

School exercise programs don't raise achievement: four of the five largest RCTs are null, and more dose doesn't rescue it. Exercise for health, not for grades.

no effectconf: mediumgc: low
24/2429/48connected:Does teaching movement transfer to

Physical activity as an input — dose, fitness, and school outcomes · health · ages 4–18 · input

Never operationalised well enough to test: no MI-based trial meets even a loose evidential bar. Four decades in, a valid evaluation is still impossible.

insufficientconf: mediumgc: medium
4/43/48connected:Does teaching movement transfer to

Should Gardner's multiple intelligences be used as a basis for instruction? · debunked · ages 4–18 · debunked

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