The Evidence on Teaching

Explore the evidence

20 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
big claim, weak designABCD-1-0.50+0.5+1+1.5effect size (d)Accountability and Flexibility in Public Schools: Evidence from Boston's Charters and Pilots — Boston pilot ELEMENTARY schools (the one place pilots do move scores): d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAccountability and Flexibility in Public Schools: Evidence from Boston's Charters and Pilots — Boston pilot MIDDLE and HIGH schools (in-district autonomy, same city): d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentResearch on Direct Instruction: 25 Years Beyond DISTAR — Overall DI vs comparison instruction: d = 0.87 · mixed · end-of-treatmentResearch on Direct Instruction: 25 Years Beyond DISTAR — Overall DI vs comparison instruction, averaged per outcome VARIABLE rather than per study: d = 0.97 · mixed · end-of-treatmentRethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing — Retention vs ALL comparisons: d = 0.61 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing — Retrieval vs RESTUDY (rereading): d = 0.51 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing — Retrieval vs no-activity/filler: d = 0.93 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAchievement Effects of Four Early Elementary Math Curricula (IES cluster RCT) — After 2 years: each of the three rivals vs Investigations: d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAchievement Effects of Four Early Elementary Math Curricula (IES cluster RCT) — After 1 year: Math Expressions / Saxon vs Investigations: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAchievement Effects of Four Early Elementary Math Curricula (IES cluster RCT) — SFAW/enVision vs Math Expressions — a year-1 deficit that closed: d = -0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAchievement Effects of Four Early Elementary Math Curricula (IES cluster RCT) — Curriculum switching after 1st grade (SFAW -> Saxon): d = 73.6 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning? A Meta-Analysis — Pure/unassisted discovery vs explicit instruction: d = -0.38 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning? A Meta-Analysis — Enhanced/GUIDED discovery vs other instruction (incl. explicit): d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning? A Meta-Analysis — Guided-discovery subtype: d = 0.5 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe myth of contextual interference learning benefit in sports practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Retention, high CI vs low CI, overall (sport settings): d = -0.159 · standardized · unclearThe myth of contextual interference learning benefit in sports practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Transfer, high CI vs low CI, overall (sport settings): d = -0.243 · standardized · unclearThe Effect of Embedding Formative Assessment on Pupil Attainment — Attainment 8 (GCSE), pre-registered primary analysis (M3): d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Embedding Formative Assessment on Pupil Attainment — Sensitivity: schools not already running the developers' similar TEEP programme: d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Embedding Formative Assessment on Pupil Attainment — Complier-average causal effect (IV on a "minimal compliance" measure): d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Embedding Formative Assessment on Pupil Attainment — Disadvantage (FSM) subgroup: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe impact of formative assessment on student achievement: A study of the effects of changes to classroom practice after a comprehensive professional development programme — Year-4 mathematics achievement: d = 0.3 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Urban Massachusetts charter middle schools, math: d = 0.336 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Urban Massachusetts charter middle schools, ELA: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Non-urban Massachusetts charter middle schools (same design, advantaged intakes): d = -0.155 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Urban charter high schools: d = 0.359 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Non-urban charter high schools: d = -0.246 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExplaining Charter School Effectiveness — Lowest-baseline-quartile students at urban charters (the intake-dependence result): d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInvestigating the Causal Effects of Arts Education — Standardised reading achievement (STAAR): d = -0.019 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInvestigating the Causal Effects of Arts Education — Standardised mathematics achievement (STAAR): d = -0.001 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInvestigating the Causal Effects of Arts Education — Standardised writing achievement (STAAR), grades 4 and 7 only: d = 0.128 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLearning About Culture: Overarching Evaluators' Report — First Thing Music - reading attainment (PIRA): d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLearning About Culture: Overarching Evaluators' Report — Pooled Key Stage 2 writing attainment (exploratory, not pre-specified): d = -0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Play’s the Thing: Experimentally Examining the Social and Cognitive Effects of School Field Trips to Live Theater Performances — Tolerance: d = 0.142 · researcher-designed · under-1yrThe Play’s the Thing: Experimentally Examining the Social and Cognitive Effects of School Field Trips to Live Theater Performances — Content knowledge (plot and vocabulary of the play watched): d = 0.101 · researcher-designed · under-1yrThe Play’s the Thing: Experimentally Examining the Social and Cognitive Effects of School Field Trips to Live Theater Performances — Social perspective taking: d = 0.169 · researcher-designed · under-1yrMeasuring Critical Thinking: Results From an Art Museum Field Trip Experiment — Blind-rated critical thinking about an unfamiliar representational painting: d = 0.1 · researcher-designed · under-1yrMeasuring Critical Thinking: Results From an Art Museum Field Trip Experiment — Blind-rated critical thinking about an unfamiliar abstract painting: d = 0.13 · researcher-designed · under-1yrThe Effect of Drama-based Pedagogies on K-12 Literacy-Related Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of 30 Years of Research — Achievement outcomes overall: d = 0.64 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Drama-based Pedagogies on K-12 Literacy-Related Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of 30 Years of Research — Dose and deliverer: d = 3 (pinned to edge) · mixed · end-of-treatmentReview of Evidence: Arts Integration Research Through the Lens of the Every Student Succeeds Act — All student outcomes, arts integration: d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Coaching Programs on Achievement Test Performance — Achievement test score after coaching, typical study: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCoaching for the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Further Synthesis and Appraisal — SAT-V, coached vs control, published comparison studies: d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCoaching for the Scholastic Aptitude Test: Further Synthesis and Appraisal — SAT-M, coached vs control, published comparison studies: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTHE EFFECTS OF INSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE IN CONTENT-INDEPENDENT TEST-TAKING TECHNIQUES UPON THE STANDARDIZED READING TEST SCORES OF SELECTED SECOND-GRADE STUDENTS — Standardized reading test score, immediate posttest: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTHE EFFECTS OF INSTRUCTION AND PRACTICE IN CONTENT-INDEPENDENT TEST-TAKING TECHNIQUES UPON THE STANDARDIZED READING TEST SCORES OF SELECTED SECOND-GRADE STUDENTS — Standardized reading test score, delayed posttest: d = 0.25 · standardized · under-1yrRETRACTED: Role of test motivation in intelligence testing — Original pooled effect of material incentives on IQ scores: d = 0.64 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRETRACTED: Role of test motivation in intelligence testing — Reanalysis excluding the retracted input study: d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentData-Based Decision Making in Reading Interventions: A Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of the Effects for Struggling Readers — Reading intervention with DBDM vs business-as-usual: d = 0.24 · standardized · end-of-treatmentData-Based Decision Making in Reading Interventions: A Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of the Effects for Struggling Readers — Same reading intervention with vs without DBDM: d = 0.27 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Systematic Formative Evaluation: A Meta-Analysis — Systematic formative evaluation, overall: d = 0.7 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Professional Development on Teachers' Knowledge, Skill, and Self-Efficacy in Data-Based Decision-Making — Teacher knowledge, skill and self-efficacy in data-based decision making: d = 0.57 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Test Preparation on Performance of Large-Scale Educational Tests: A Meta-analysis of Experimental Studies — Test preparation effect on the prepared-for test: d = 0.26 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Test Preparation on Performance of Large-Scale Educational Tests: A Meta-analysis of Experimental Studies — Transfer of the preparation effect to a DIFFERENT test in the same domain: d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Test Preparation on Performance of Large-Scale Educational Tests: A Meta-analysis of Experimental Studies — Preparation teaching test-taking skills vs preparation that did not: d = 0.35 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Test Preparation on Performance of Large-Scale Educational Tests: A Meta-analysis of Experimental Studies — College admission tests specifically: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRetesting in selection: A meta-analysis of coaching and practice effects for tests of cognitive ability. — Retest gain, first to second administration: d = 0.26 · standardized · under-1yrAccountability, incentives and behavior: the impact of high-stakes testing in the Chicago Public Schools — High-stakes ITBS maths, relative to pre-policy trend: d = 0.3 · standardized · over-2yrAccountability, incentives and behavior: the impact of high-stakes testing in the Chicago Public Schools — High-stakes ITBS reading, relative to pre-policy trend: d = 0.2 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of Data-Based Individualization for Students With Intensive Learning Needs: A Meta-Analysis — Data-based individualisation vs business-as-usual: d = 0.37 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Data-Based Individualization for Students With Intensive Learning Needs: A Meta-Analysis — DBI-plus (enhanced components) vs business-as-usual: d = 0.38 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhat Do Test Scores in Texas Tell Us? — Grade 4 reading gains, NAEP (audit measure): d = 0.13 · standardized · over-2yrWhat Do Test Scores in Texas Tell Us? — Grade 4 reading gains, TAAS (high-stakes measure): d = 0.31 · standardized · over-2yrWhat Do Test Scores in Texas Tell Us? — Grade 8 reading gains, TAAS: d = 0.28 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of Practice on Aptitude and Achievement Test Scores — Score gain from ONE practice trial, identical form: d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Practice on Aptitude and Achievement Test Scores — Score gain from ONE practice trial, parallel form: d = 0.23 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTransitioning From Studying Examples to Solving Problems: Self-Explanation Prompts and Fading Worked-Out Steps — Backward fading vs example-problem pairs (near transfer): d = 0.46 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTransitioning From Studying Examples to Solving Problems: Self-Explanation Prompts and Fading Worked-Out Steps — Self-explanation prompts vs none (near transfer): d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAssessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance — Math achievement, 10 fewer absences: d = 0.055 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance — Reading achievement, 10 fewer absences: d = 0.029 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance — Math achievement, 10 additional calendar school days before testing: d = 0.017 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance — Reading achievement, 10 additional calendar school days before testing: d = 0.008 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLeveraging Parents through Low-Cost Technology — State standardized test score, math (primary preregistered outcome): d = -0.004 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLeveraging Parents through Low-Cost Technology — State standardized test score, reading (primary preregistered outcome): d = -0.056 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLeveraging Parents through Low-Cost Technology — In-class exam scores (count toward the grade that triggers an alert): d = 0.104 · mixed · end-of-treatmentLeveraging Parents through Low-Cost Technology — Assignment scores: d = 0.063 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAddressing Chronic Absenteeism in Schools: A Meta-Analysis of Evidence-Based Interventions — Attendance, between-group controlled designs: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAddressing Chronic Absenteeism in Schools: A Meta-Analysis of Evidence-Based Interventions — Attendance, within-group (pre-post) designs: d = 1.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAddressing Chronic Absenteeism in Schools: A Meta-Analysis of Evidence-Based Interventions — Attendance, by intervention family: d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Math achievement, per own day absent (student fixed effects, Table 2 col 2): d = -0.008 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — ELA achievement, per own day absent (student fixed effects, Table 2 col 4): d = -0.008 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Math achievement, per PEER day absent (student fixed effects, Table 2 col 2): d = -0.008 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Math achievement, per own day absent (SCHOOL-GRADE fixed effects, Table 2 col 1): d = -0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Math achievement, per snow-induced absence (IV, Table 6): d = -0.052 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — ELA achievement, per snow-induced absence (IV, Table 6): d = -0.014 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Achievement per closure day in POOR schools (>50% poverty; Tables 3 and 7): d = -0.006 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFlaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time — Math achievement, per total day missed, naive single-instrument IV (Table 5): d = -0.023 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Mentoring on School Attendance and Academic Outcomes: A Randomized Evaluation of the Check & Connect Program — Math achievement (MAP and state accountability test), pooled cohorts: d = -0.085 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Mentoring on School Attendance and Academic Outcomes: A Randomized Evaluation of the Check & Connect Program — Reading achievement (MAP and state accountability test), pooled cohorts: d = -0.047 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhat Works to Keep Students in School? A Meta-Analysis of Interventions to Reduce School Absenteeism — School absenteeism: d = 0.091 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe short- and long-run impacts of secondary school absences — Math or ELA state test score, per 10 class-period absences in that subject: d = -0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe short- and long-run impacts of secondary school absences — Math test score, naive value-added model WITHOUT the student-year shock proxy: d = -0.082 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe short- and long-run impacts of secondary school absences — ELA test score in MIDDLE school, per 10 ELA absences — NULL: d = 0.001 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe short- and long-run impacts of secondary school absences — Course grades, per 10 class-period absences: d = -0.169 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe short- and long-run impacts of secondary school absences — Course grades from absences occurring AFTER the state testing window: d = -0.475 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Relationship Between Student Attendance and Achievement, Pre- and Post-COVID — Math achievement, per day absent (2023-24): d = -0.0057 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Relationship Between Student Attendance and Achievement, Pre- and Post-COVID — Implied achievement recovery from returning to pre-pandemic absence rates: d = 0.017 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPersistence and Fadeout in the Impacts of Child and Adolescent Interventions — Cognitive/achievement effects over time, 67 ECE evaluations: d = 0.23 · mixed · over-2yrPersistence and Fadeout in the Impacts of Child and Adolescent Interventions — Special education placement — META-ANALYTIC average (7 studies, 15 effect sizes): d = -0.397 · mixed · over-2yrPersistence and Fadeout in the Impacts of Child and Adolescent Interventions — Grade retention — META-ANALYTIC average (16 studies, 34 effect sizes): d = -0.288 · mixed · over-2yrPrep School for Poor Kids: The Long-Run Impacts of Head Start on Human Capital and Economic Self-Sufficiency — Adult human capital index (Table 1): d = 0.18 · standardized · adulthoodPrep School for Poor Kids: The Long-Run Impacts of Head Start on Human Capital and Economic Self-Sufficiency — Economic self-sufficiency index (Table 4): d = 0.092 · standardized · adulthoodThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Anxiety, ages 2-3 (Table 1; higher = worse): d = 0.115 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Aggression, ages 2-3 (Table 1; higher = worse): d = 0.117 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Hyperactivity, ages 2-3 (Table 1; higher = worse): d = 0.065 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — PPVT vocabulary, ages 4-5 (Table 1): d = -0.109 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Anxiety, ages 5-9 (Table 2; higher = worse): d = 0.278 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Aggression, ages 5-9 (Table 2; higher = worse): d = 0.169 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Indirect aggression, ages 5-9 (Table 2; higher = worse): d = 0.19 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Hyperactivity, ages 5-9 (Table 2; higher = worse): d = 0.13 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Pro-social behaviour, ages 5-9 (Table 2): d = 0.006 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Science test scores, ages 13-16 (Table 3): d = -0.062 · standardized · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Self-reported health, ages 12-20 (Table 4; higher = worse): d = 0.073 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Life satisfaction, ages 12-20 (Table 4; higher = worse): d = 0.043 · self-report · over-2yrThe Long-Run Impacts of a Universal Child Care Program — Self-reported mental health, ages 12-20 (Table 4): d = -0.011 · self-report · over-2yrA Meta-Analysis of the Worked Examples Effect on Mathematics Performance — Overall worked examples vs problem solving (math): d = 0.48 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Worked Examples Effect on Mathematics Performance — Publication-bias adjusted: d = 0.44 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Tennis serve accuracy (pooled, 2 studies, n=66): d = 1.05 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Tennis serve ball stroke velocity (pooled, 2 studies, n=66): d = 0.83 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffect of Motor Imagery Training on Motor Learning in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Combined serve performance, accuracy x velocity (pooled, 2 studies, n=66): d = 1.87 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentCan Restorative Practices Improve School Climate and Curb Suspensions? An Evaluation of the Impact of Restorative Practices in a Mid-Sized Urban School District — Combined math and reading state assessment, grades 3-8 (primary achievement outcome): d = -0.065 · standardized · over-2yrCan Restorative Practices Improve School Climate and Curb Suspensions? An Evaluation of the Impact of Restorative Practices in a Mid-Sized Urban School District — PSSA mathematics, grades 3-8: d = -0.068 · standardized · over-2yrCan Restorative Practices Improve School Climate and Curb Suspensions? An Evaluation of the Impact of Restorative Practices in a Mid-Sized Urban School District — PSSA reading, grades 3-8: d = -0.055 · standardized · over-2yrThe Long-Run Effects of Disruptive Peers — Contemporaneous test scores, grades 3-5: d = -0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Run Effects of Disruptive Peers — Test scores, grades 9-10: d = -0.02 · standardized · over-2yrDiscipline Reform, School Culture and Student Achievement — Math achievement, more-affected schools: d = 0.05 · standardized · over-2yrDiscipline Reform, School Culture and Student Achievement — Reading achievement: d = 0.03 · standardized · over-2yrGood Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Reading (Hodder Group Reading Test), ITT: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGood Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Concentration problems (teacher-rated), ITT: d = 0.03 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGood Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Disruptive behaviour (teacher-rated), ITT: d = 0.06 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGood Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Pro-social behaviour (teacher-rated), ITT: d = -0.13 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGood Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Disruptive behaviour, pre-specified at-risk boys subgroup: d = -0.3 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — All outcomes pooled (academic, behavioural, social-emotional, motivational, other): d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — All outcomes pooled, CORRECTED for publication bias: d = 0.17 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — Academic outcomes: d = 0.17 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — Behavioural outcomes: d = 0.24 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — Social-emotional outcomes: d = 0.21 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Strategies and Classroom Management Programs on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — Motivational outcomes: d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAn Update of the Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Classroom Management Interventions on Students' Academic, Behavioral, Social-Emotional, and Motivational Outcomes — All outcomes pooled: d = 0.23 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDo Suspensions Affect Student Outcomes? — Peer achievement spillover from suspensions for serious (non-classroom-disorder) misconduct: d = -0.004 · standardized · under-1yrUpdating and expanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports — School behaviour (disciplinary exclusions, suspensions, office discipline referrals, teacher ratings), pooled: d = -0.257 · mixed · unclearUpdating and expanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports — Academic achievement (state tests), pooled: d = 0.113 · standardized · unclearUpdating and expanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports — Organizational health (staff affiliation, resource influence, academic emphasis, collegial leadership): d = 0.374 · self-report · unclearSchool-based interventions for reducing disciplinary school exclusion: a systematic review — Use of exclusion (all types pooled), post-treatment: d = 0.3 · standardized · under-1yrSchool-based interventions for reducing disciplinary school exclusion: a systematic review — Use of exclusion at follow-up (12+ months after the intervention ends): d = 0.15 · standardized · 1-2yrSchool-based interventions for reducing disciplinary school exclusion: a systematic review — Antisocial behaviour: d = -0.005 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSchool-based interventions for reducing disciplinary school exclusion: a systematic review — Evaluator independence (post-hoc moderator): d = 18 (pinned to edge) · standardized · not-applicableExperimental Evidence on Distributional Effects of Head Start — PPVT MEAN effect, full 3-year-old sample, Head Start year: d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExperimental Evidence on Distributional Effects of Head Start — PPVT, Spanish speakers, Head Start year: d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExperimental Evidence on Distributional Effects of Head Start — PPVT, Spanish speakers, persistence to end of Grade 1: d = 0.38 · standardized · over-2yrIntensive Reading Remediation in Grade 2 or 3: Are There Effects a Decade Later? — Word recognition (Woodcock Word ID) - persists: d = 1.69 (pinned to edge) · standardized · over-2yrIntensive Reading Remediation in Grade 2 or 3: Are There Effects a Decade Later? — Basic Skills Cluster - persists: d = 0.53 · standardized · over-2yrIntensive Reading Remediation in Grade 2 or 3: Are There Effects a Decade Later? — Decoding (Word Attack) - fades: d = 0.14 · standardized · over-2yrIntensive Reading Remediation in Grade 2 or 3: Are There Effects a Decade Later? — Passage comprehension - fades to ~0: d = 0.55 · standardized · over-2yrAssessment and Classroom Learning / Inside the Black Box — Formative assessment on achievement (claimed): d = 0.4 · unknown · end-of-treatmentCurriculum Reform in the Common Core Era: Evaluating Elementary Math Textbooks Across Six US States — Between-textbook variation in achievement gains (SD of the textbook random effect): d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCurriculum Reform in the Common Core Era: Evaluating Elementary Math Textbooks Across Six US States — Best-case textbook advantage (CA 95th percentile, ~2 SD above the mean textbook): d = 0.054 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring — Tutoring + mastery learning bundle vs conventional class: overall summative achievement: d = 2 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a formative assessment practice on student achievement in mathematics — Year-7 mathematics achievement: d = 0 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — Synthetic-systematic phonics vs whole language (only 4 relevant NRP studies): d = 0.91 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — NRP (2000) headline systematic-phonics effect, immediate vs 4-12 month delay: d = 0.41 · mixed · under-1yrReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — NRP systematic phonics for "low achieving" poor readers (below-average or unassessed cognitive level, above grade 1): d = 0.15 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — NRP systematic phonics vs whole language specifically (12 studies, none an RCT): d = 0.31 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — Camilli et al. (2006) multilevel reanalysis — systematic vs UNsystematic phonics: d = 0.12 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — Torgerson et al. (2006) RCT-only word reading accuracy, excluding the confounded Umbach 1989 outlier (d = 2.69): d = 0.2 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReconsidering the Evidence That Systematic Phonics Is More Effective Than Alternative Methods of Reading Instruction (+ 2021 reply to Fletcher) — Galuschka et al. (2014) phonics effect after trim-and-fill correction for publication bias: d = 0.198 · mixed · end-of-treatmentContextual interference: a meta-analytic study — Overall CI effect (retention and transfer combined), random vs blocked: d = 0.38 · mixed · end-of-treatmentContextual interference: a meta-analytic study — CI effect in basic/laboratory research: d = 0.57 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentContextual interference: a meta-analytic study — CI effect in applied research (sport skills): d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSimilarity Matters: A Meta-Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Its Moderators — Overall interleaving vs blocking: d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · unclearSimilarity Matters: A Meta-Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Its Moderators — Paintings / visual category learning (best case): d = 0.67 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentSimilarity Matters: A Meta-Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Its Moderators — Mathematics: d = 0.34 · researcher-designed · unclearSimilarity Matters: A Meta-Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Its Moderators — Word learning — BLOCKING wins (reversal): d = -0.39 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRelative age effect reversal on the junior-to-senior transition in world-class athletics — Birth-quartile skew (Q1 over-representation) in the U18 category: d = 0.1 · standardized · not-applicableIs Gifted Education a Bright Idea? Assessing the Impact of Gifted and Talented Programs on Students — Marginal gifted-eligible students, achievement (RD at the eligibility cutoff): d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs Gifted Education a Bright Idea? Assessing the Impact of Gifted and Talented Programs on Students — Attending a gifted magnet programme, achievement (lottery 2SLS): d = 0.28 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTeaching Children to Read: The Fragile Link Between Science & Federal Education Policy — Systematic vs SOME phonics (weighted regression): d = 0.241 · mixed · end-of-treatmentTeaching Children to Read: The Fragile Link Between Science & Federal Education Policy — Individual tutoring (moderator): d = 0.399 · mixed · end-of-treatmentTeaching Children to Read: The Fragile Link Between Science & Federal Education Policy — Studies using standardized tests: d = 0.186 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis and Reading Policy: Perspectives on Teaching Children to Read — Systematic phonics net of language activities and tutoring (TP2): d = 0.123 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis and Reading Policy: Perspectives on Teaching Children to Read — Individual tutoring (moderator): d = 0.489 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis and Reading Policy: Perspectives on Teaching Children to Read — Language-based literacy activities in the treatment arm (TL2, moderator): d = 0.21 · mixed · end-of-treatmentImpacts of Academic Recovery Interventions on Student Achievement, 2022-23 (Road to Recovery, 8 districts) — The outliers that worked: d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Teaching Mathematics with Concrete Manipulatives — Manipulatives vs abstract-symbols-only instruction, aggregate: d = 0.37 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Gifted Education Work? For Which Students? — Plan B gifted admission at IQ 116 — grade 4 WRITING: d = 0.116 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes Gifted Education Work? For Which Students? — Spillover onto classmates ranked 25-44 when top students are removed to a gifted classroom: d = -0.002 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSpacing Effects in Learning: A Temporal Ridgeline of Optimal Retention — Aggregate optimal-gap advantage collapsed across retention intervals: d = 64 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · under-1yrHow Does Your Kindergarten Classroom Affect Your Earnings? Evidence from Project Star — Summary index of adult outcomes (home ownership, 401k, mobility, ZIP quality, marriage): d = 0.046 · standardized · adulthoodMeasuring the Impacts of Teachers I: Evaluating Bias in Teacher Value-Added Estimates — Dispersion of teacher effects on end-of-year scores (the quantity VA measures): d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEver Failed, Try Again, Succeed Better: Results from a Randomized Educational Intervention on Grit — Standardized mathematics test, short run: d = 0.31 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEver Failed, Try Again, Succeed Better: Results from a Randomized Educational Intervention on Grit — Standardized mathematics test, 1.5 and 2.5 years later: d = 0.19 · standardized · over-2yrThe Tools of the Mind curriculum for improving self-regulation in early childhood: a sytematic review — Mathematics skills: d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Tools of the Mind curriculum for improving self-regulation in early childhood: a sytematic review — Literacy: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUsing Social-Emotional and Character Development to Improve Academic Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Low-Income, Urban Schools — Illinois state test mathematics, all students: d = 0.38 · standardized · over-2yrUsing Social-Emotional and Character Development to Improve Academic Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Low-Income, Urban Schools — Illinois state test reading, all students: d = 0.22 · standardized · over-2yrUsing Social-Emotional and Character Development to Improve Academic Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Low-Income, Urban Schools — School-level absenteeism: d = -0.78 · standardized · over-2yrImplicit Theories of Intelligence Predict Achievement Across an Adolescent Transition: A Longitudinal Study and an Intervention — Mindset belief change (Study 2 manipulation check): d = 0.66 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentClosing the Achievement Gap through Modification of Neurocognitive and Neuroendocrine Function: Results from a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of an Innovative Approach to the Education of Children in Kindergarten — Backward digit span (working memory), whole sample: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentClosing the Achievement Gap through Modification of Neurocognitive and Neuroendocrine Function: Results from a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of an Innovative Approach to the Education of Children in Kindergarten — Mathematics, whole sample: d = 0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentClosing the Achievement Gap through Modification of Neurocognitive and Neuroendocrine Function: Results from a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of an Innovative Approach to the Education of Children in Kindergarten — Reading at first-grade follow-up: d = 0.14 · standardized · 1-2yrA systematic review and meta-analysis of growth mindset interventions: For whom, how, and why might such interventions work? — Academic achievement, targeted subsamples with high fidelity: d = 0.14 · mixed · unclearA systematic review and meta-analysis of growth mindset interventions: For whom, how, and why might such interventions work? — Mental health, same conditioning: d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · unclearThe state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions — Academic achievement: d = 0.109 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions — Overall effect across all outcomes: d = 0.194 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions — SEL skills: d = 0.219 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions — School discipline outcomes: d = 0.183 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe state of evidence for social and emotional learning: A contemporary meta-analysis of universal school-based SEL interventions — Follow-up effects: d = 0.167 · mixed · 1-2yrEffective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research — Reading achievement: d = 0.25 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research — Mathematics achievement: d = 0.26 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffective universal school-based social and emotional learning programs for improving academic achievement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 50 years of research — Science achievement: d = 0.19 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDo mindfulness-based programmes improve the cognitive skills, behaviour and mental health of children and adolescents? An updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials — Executive functioning, all studies: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo mindfulness-based programmes improve the cognitive skills, behaviour and mental health of children and adolescents? An updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials — Executive functioning against ACTIVE controls: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo mindfulness-based programmes improve the cognitive skills, behaviour and mental health of children and adolescents? An updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials — Executive functioning against passive controls: d = 0.35 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Enhancing Students' Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions — Academic performance: d = 0.27 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Enhancing Students' Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions — SEL skills: d = 0.57 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Enhancing Students' Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions — Conduct problems: d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Enhancing Students' Social and Emotional Learning: A Meta-Analysis of School-Based Universal Interventions — Grand mean across all outcomes: d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPromoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation report and Executive summary — Year 6 English (Key Stage 2 SATs, externally marked): d = -0.106 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPromoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation report and Executive summary — Year 6 mathematics (Key Stage 2 SATs): d = -0.025 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPromoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS): Evaluation report and Executive summary — Year 5 mathematics and reading (InCAS standardised): d = 0.026 · standardized · end-of-treatmentChanging Mindsets: Effectiveness trial — Evaluation Report — KS2 mathematics (externally marked national test): d = -0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentChanging Mindsets: Effectiveness trial — Evaluation Report — KS2 reading (externally marked national test): d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentChanging Mindsets: Effectiveness trial — Evaluation Report — KS2 grammar, punctuation and spelling: d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes Self-Control Training Improve Self-Control? A Meta-Analysis — Self-control training, uncorrected (RVE, all 158 effects): d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Self-Control Training Improve Self-Control? A Meta-Analysis — Self-control training, trim-and-fill corrected: d = 0.24 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Self-Control Training Improve Self-Control? A Meta-Analysis — Self-control training, PEESE corrected: d = 0.13 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Self-Control Training Improve Self-Control? A Meta-Analysis — Author allegiance moderator (strength-model proponents as co-authors): d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatmentGrowth-Mindset Interventions at Scale: Experimental Evidence From Argentina — National assessment mathematics (IRT-scaled, government-administered): d = -0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrowth-Mindset Interventions at Scale: Experimental Evidence From Argentina — National assessment reading: d = -0.051 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCan growth mindset interventions improve academic achievement? A structured review of the existing evidence — Academic achievement in the highest-quality (4-star) studies: d = -0.01 · standardized · unclearEffectiveness of interventions adopting a whole school approach to enhancing social and emotional development: a meta-analysis — Social and emotional adjustment: d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of interventions adopting a whole school approach to enhancing social and emotional development: a meta-analysis — Behavioural adjustment: d = 0.134 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of interventions adopting a whole school approach to enhancing social and emotional development: a meta-analysis — Internalising symptoms: d = 0.109 · self-report · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of interventions adopting a whole school approach to enhancing social and emotional development: a meta-analysis — School performance / academic achievement — NULL: d = 0.193 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDisentangling the Effects of Social and Emotional Learning Programs on Student Academic Achievement Across Grades 1-12: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis — Academic achievement: d = 0.101 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal school-based mindfulness training compared with normal school provision in reducing risk of mental health problems and promoting well-being in adolescence: the MYRIAD cluster randomised controlled trial — Risk for depression at 1 year (self-report): d = 0.005 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrEffectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal school-based mindfulness training compared with normal school provision in reducing risk of mental health problems and promoting well-being in adolescence: the MYRIAD cluster randomised controlled trial — Social-emotional-behavioural functioning at 1 year (self-report SDQ): d = 0.02 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrEffectiveness and cost-effectiveness of universal school-based mindfulness training compared with normal school provision in reducing risk of mental health problems and promoting well-being in adolescence: the MYRIAD cluster randomised controlled trial — Wellbeing at 1 year (self-report): d = 0.02 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrDo growth mindset interventions impact students' academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices. — Academic achievement, all studies: d = 0.05 · mixed · unclearDo growth mindset interventions impact students' academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices. — Academic achievement, studies where the manipulation check succeeded: d = 0.04 · mixed · unclearDo growth mindset interventions impact students' academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices. — Academic achievement, highest-quality subset: d = 0.02 · mixed · unclearEffectiveness of Universal Self-regulation-Based Interventions in Children and Adolescents — Self-regulation task performance (Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders, Flanker and similar): d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Universal Self-regulation-Based Interventions in Children and Adolescents — Social and personal skills subgroup (the largest effect): d = 0.64 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis update on the effectiveness of early self-control improvement programs to improve self-control and reduce delinquency — Self-control (rater-report instruments): d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis update on the effectiveness of early self-control improvement programs to improve self-control and reduce delinquency — Delinquency and problem behaviour (parent/teacher report): d = 0.27 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentCSRP's Impact on Low-Income Preschoolers' Preacademic Skills: Self-Regulation as a Mediating Mechanism — Executive function (direct child assessment): d = 0.37 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCSRP's Impact on Low-Income Preschoolers' Preacademic Skills: Self-Regulation as a Mediating Mechanism — Attention / impulse control: d = 0.43 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCSRP's Impact on Low-Income Preschoolers' Preacademic Skills: Self-Regulation as a Mediating Mechanism — Early mathematics and letter naming: d = 0.54 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCSRP's Impact on Low-Income Preschoolers' Preacademic Skills: Self-Regulation as a Mediating Mechanism — Receptive vocabulary (PPVT): d = 0.34 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCSRP's Impact on Low-Income Preschoolers' Preacademic Skills: Self-Regulation as a Mediating Mechanism — Effortful control: d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHow can we inspire nations of learners? An investigation of growth mindset and challenge-seeking in two countries. — Behavioural challenge-seeking task (hard minus easy problems chosen), US NSLM: d = 0.24 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHow can we inspire nations of learners? An investigation of growth mindset and challenge-seeking in two countries. — Behavioural challenge-seeking task (hard minus easy problems chosen), Norway U-Say: d = 0.18 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHow can we inspire nations of learners? An investigation of growth mindset and challenge-seeking in two countries. — Fixed-mindset belief (manipulation check): d = 0.33 · self-report · end-of-treatmentEfficacy of the Responsive Classroom Approach: Results From a 3-Year, Longitudinal Randomized Controlled Trial — Practice use to achievement (mediation, non-causal): d = 0.26 · standardized · over-2yrIs Cognitive Training Effective for Improving Executive Functions in Preschoolers? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Executive-function outcomes overall: d = 0.342 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs Cognitive Training Effective for Improving Executive Functions in Preschoolers? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Transfer to executive functions that WERE directly trained (authors' "near transfer"): d = 0.352 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs Cognitive Training Effective for Improving Executive Functions in Preschoolers? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Transfer to executive functions NOT directly trained (the authors call this "far transfer", but it stays inside EF, so near-transfer by this archive's taxonomy): d = 0.318 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTo What Extent and Under Which Circumstances Are Growth Mind-Sets Important to Academic Achievement? Two Meta-Analyses — Growth-mindset intervention effect on academic achievement (Meta-Analysis 2): d = 0.08 · mixed · unclearImpact of a Social-Emotional and Character Development Program on School-Level Indicators of Academic Achievement, Absenteeism, and Disciplinary Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial — Mathematics proficiency, school level: d = 1.1 · standardized · 1-2yrImpact of a Social-Emotional and Character Development Program on School-Level Indicators of Academic Achievement, Absenteeism, and Disciplinary Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial — Reading, percentage at or above average: d = 0.54 · standardized · 1-2yrImpact of a Social-Emotional and Character Development Program on School-Level Indicators of Academic Achievement, Absenteeism, and Disciplinary Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial — Absenteeism: d = -0.65 · standardized · 1-2yrImpact of a Social-Emotional and Character Development Program on School-Level Indicators of Academic Achievement, Absenteeism, and Disciplinary Outcomes: A Matched-Pair, Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial — Suspensions: d = -0.87 · standardized · 1-2yrThe efficacy of different interventions to foster children's executive function skills: A series of meta-analyses. — Overall executive-function outcomes at post-test: d = 0.3 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of different interventions to foster children's executive function skills: A series of meta-analyses. — Explicit EF training, typically developing vs atypical children: d = 0.46 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of different interventions to foster children's executive function skills: A series of meta-analyses. — Aerobic exercise alone: d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of different interventions to foster children's executive function skills: A series of meta-analyses. — EF curricula at follow-up: d = -0.03 · standardized · under-1yrThe impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international transferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: a meta-analysis — Developer-led versus developer-involved versus independent, social-emotional competence: d = 0.21 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of trial stage, developer involvement and international transferability on universal social and emotional learning programme outcomes: a meta-analysis — Academic achievement overall: d = 0.28 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSocial and emotional learning in primary schools: A review of the current state of evidence — Whole-school SEL effect on social-emotional skills (Goldberg et al.): d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement — Growth-mindset beliefs (self-report): d = 0.33 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Cognition as reported BY the 24 source meta-analyses (median of their own headline effects): d = 0.29 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Global cognition (composite of EF, memory, processing speed): d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Cognition, trials using a NON-PHYSICAL ACTIVE control (vs 0.26 with passive controls): d = 0.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Global cognition after adjusting for active control + baseline differences: d = 0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Global cognition, PET-PEESE publication-bias correction (multilevel, all primary RCTs): d = -0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Global cognition after publication-bias correction (robust Bayesian model-averaged): d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAn umbrella review of randomized control trials on the effects of physical exercise on cognition — Specification-curve range across defensible analytic choices: d = -0.05 · standardized · not-applicableMathematics Learned by Young Children in an Intervention Based on Learning Trajectories: A Large-Scale Cluster Randomized Trial — Preschool mathematics at end of pre-K: d = 0.72 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEducational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-Analysis of Findings — Tutee achievement, pooled: d = 0.4 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEducational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-Analysis of Findings — Duration: d = 0 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Program on Student Reading Achievement — State reading achievement (ISAT), grade 4: d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Program on Student Reading Achievement — MAP's own reading + language composite, grade 4: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Program on Student Reading Achievement — State reading achievement (ISAT), grade 5: d = -0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Program on Student Reading Achievement — MAP's own reading + language composite, grade 5: d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIntensive Math Instruction and Educational Attainment: Long-Run Impacts of Double-Dose Algebra (with the PNAS 12-year follow-up) — Math achievement, fall-11th PLAN and spring-11th ACT (JHR Table 7): d = 0.235 · standardized · over-2yrIntensive Math Instruction and Educational Attainment: Long-Run Impacts of Double-Dose Algebra (with the PNAS 12-year follow-up) — ACT verbal score (JHR Table 7): d = 0.273 · standardized · over-2yrCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Total ADHD symptoms, most-proximal (typically UNBLINDED) raters: d = 0.37 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Total ADHD symptoms, probably-blinded raters: d = 0.2 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Total ADHD symptoms, WORKING-MEMORY TRAINING alone: d = 0 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Total ADHD symptoms, MULTI-PROCESS training, most-proximal raters: d = 0.79 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Inattention, most-proximal raters: d = 0.47 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Inattention, probably-blinded raters: d = 0.32 · self-report · end-of-treatmentCognitive training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: meta-analysis of clinical and neuropsychological outcomes from randomized controlled trials — Parent-rated executive function (BRIEF), most-proximal raters: d = 0.35 · self-report · end-of-treatmentUrban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions — Urban charter students, math (overall): d = 0.055 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUrban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions — Urban charter students, reading (overall): d = 0.039 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUrban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions — English-language-learner students taken as a single subgroup: d = 0.041 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUrban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions — First year of charter enrollment: d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUrban Charter School Study Report on 41 Regions — Trend across growth periods: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEnhancing computational thinking in early childhood education with educational robotics: A meta-analysis — Computational thinking after educational robotics: d = 0.9317 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentCoding in Primary Grades Boosts Children’s Executive Functions — Coding accuracy: d = 1.62 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentCoding in Primary Grades Boosts Children’s Executive Functions — Planning (Tower of London accuracy): d = 0.95 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCoding in Primary Grades Boosts Children’s Executive Functions — Planning (Elithorn Maze accuracy): d = 0.8 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCoding in Primary Grades Boosts Children’s Executive Functions — Response inhibition (NEPSY-II errors; negative d means fewer errors): d = -0.65 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of coding on children's planning and inhibition skills — Planning: d = 1.27 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of coding on children's planning and inhibition skills — Response inhibition (negative d means fewer errors): d = -0.71 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of coding on children's planning and inhibition skills — Problem solving (labelled near transfer by the authors): d = 1.31 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentProgramming and 21st century skill development in K-12 schools: A multidimensional meta-analysis — Composite 21st century skills: d = 0.621 · mixed · end-of-treatmentImpact of programming on primary mathematics learning — Euclidean division: d = -0.16 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpact of programming on primary mathematics learning — Additive decomposition: d = -0.19 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpact of programming on primary mathematics learning — Fractions (CM2 pupils only): d = -0.21 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe transfer effect of computational thinking (CT)-STEM: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis — Overall computational-thinking-STEM transfer: d = 0.601 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe transfer effect of computational thinking (CT)-STEM: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis — Near transfer (CT skills, programming, algorithmic thinking, STEM achievement): d = 0.645 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe transfer effect of computational thinking (CT)-STEM: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis — Far transfer (creativity, critical thinking, problem solving): d = 0.444 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Computer Programming on Cognitive Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis — Pooled cognitive-ability outcomes: d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReducing withdrawal and failure rates in introductory programming with subgoal labeled worked examples — Formative quiz performance: d = 0.44 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentReducing withdrawal and failure rates in introductory programming with subgoal labeled worked examples — Total summative exam score: d = 0.26 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study — Problem solving (labelled near transfer by the review itself): d = 0.89 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study — Planning: d = 0.364 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study — Working memory (accuracy): d = 0.199 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study — Response inhibition (accuracy): d = 0.168 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive effects of computational thinking: A systematic review and meta-analytic study — Cognitive flexibility (accuracy): d = 0.118 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Overall transfer, all cognitive outcomes pooled: d = 0.49 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Near transfer — programming skills (13 studies, 19 effect sizes): d = 0.75 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Far transfer — cognitive skills outside programming: d = 0.47 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Far transfer against ACTIVE (treated) control groups — the decisive moderator: d = 0.15 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Overall transfer on standardized tests only, after removing influential cases: d = 0.33 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Publication-bias-corrected overall transfer: d = 0.43 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Far transfer — mathematical skills: d = 0.57 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Far transfer — school achievement: d = 0.28 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. — Far transfer — literacy: d = -0.02 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions — Learning to program (programming interventions per se): d = 0.814 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions — Visualisation-based interventions (e.g. Scratch): d = 0.436 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions — Visualisation — publication-bias-corrected estimate (trim-and-fill): d = 0.373 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions — Physicality-based interventions (robotics and tangibles): d = 0.718 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe effects of programming interventions in early childhood: A meta-analysis — Combined programming knowledge, computational thinking, mathematics and cognitive skills: d = 0.73 · mixed · end-of-treatmentRandomised Controlled Trial and Process Evaluation of Code Clubs — Computational thinking (Bebras Computational Thinking Assessment): d = 0.93 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRandomised Controlled Trial and Process Evaluation of Code Clubs — Coding skill (Scratch, HTML/CSS and Python Coding Quiz): d = 1.49 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffective instruction conditions for educational robotics to develop programming ability of K-12 students: A meta-analysis — Essential programming ability: d = 0.539 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffective instruction conditions for educational robotics to develop programming ability of K-12 students: A meta-analysis — Generative programming ability: d = 0.535 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentBlock-based versus text-based programming environments on novice student learning outcomes: a meta-analysis study — Cognitive learning outcomes, block-based versus text-based environment: d = 0.245 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentBlock-based versus text-based programming environments on novice student learning outcomes: a meta-analysis study — Affective outcomes, block-based versus text-based: d = 0.195 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of a computer science curriculum for early childhood: evidence from a randomized controlled trial in K-2 classrooms — Coding skill (Coding Stages Assessment): d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of a computer science curriculum for early childhood: evidence from a randomized controlled trial in K-2 classrooms — Computational thinking (TechCheck): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe efficacy of a computer science curriculum for early childhood: evidence from a randomized controlled trial in K-2 classrooms — Standardized literacy achievement: d = -0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe impact of a block-based visual programming curriculum: Untangling coding skills and computational thinking — Coding proficiency in ScratchJr (Coding Stages Assessment): d = 0.68 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of a block-based visual programming curriculum: Untangling coding skills and computational thinking — Computational thinking (TechCheck, a validated unplugged assessment): d = -0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention, high CI (random) vs low CI (blocked), overall: d = 0.63 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention, overall, AFTER OUTLIER REMOVAL (the honest headline): d = 0.43 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention, laboratory studies only: d = 0.92 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention, applied/field studies only: d = 0.23 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention in young participants (<18y): d = 0.02 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention in older adults (>=60y): d = 1.45 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHigh contextual interference improves retention in motor learning: systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed retention in adults (18-59): d = 0.63 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed transfer, high CI (random) vs low CI (blocked), overall: d = 0.55 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed transfer, laboratory studies: d = 0.75 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed transfer, applied/field studies: d = 0.37 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of contextual interference on transfer in motor learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Delayed transfer in young participants (<18y): d = 0.12 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Gift of Time? School Starting Age and Mental Health — Inattention/hyperactivity at age 7, effect of a one-year delay: d = -0.7 · mixed · 1-2yrThe Gift of Time? School Starting Age and Mental Health — Inattention/hyperactivity at age 11: d = -0.68 · mixed · over-2yrEarly Childhood Intervention and Life-Cycle Skill Development: Evidence from Head Start — Young-adult summary index (schooling, idleness, crime, teen parenthood, health): d = 0.23 · mixed · adulthoodEarly Childhood Intervention and Life-Cycle Skill Development: Evidence from Head Start — Cognitive test index, ages 5-6 -> ages 11-14: d = 0.15 · standardized · over-2yrSchool Starting Age and Cognitive Development (with Bassok & Reardon on redshirting prevalence) — September-vs-August test-score effect: d = 0.2 · standardized · over-2yrAcademic Interventions for Elementary and Middle School Students With Low Socioeconomic Status: A Meta-Analysis — Tutoring component: d = 0.36 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAcademic Interventions for Elementary and Middle School Students With Low Socioeconomic Status: A Meta-Analysis — Feedback & progress monitoring / cooperative learning: d = 0.32 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Problem-Based Learning: A Meta-Analysis — PBL vs conventional on SKILLS: d = 0.46 · mixed · unclearAiming High and Falling Short: California's Eighth-Grade Algebra-for-All Effort — District-mean 10th-grade CAHSEE math per 1 SD rise in 8th-grade algebra enrollment rate: d = -0.07 · standardized · 1-2yrA meta-analytic review of the distribution of practice effect: now you see it, now you don't — Spaced vs massed practice, overall: d = 0.46 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analytic review of the distribution of practice effect: now you see it, now you don't — Intertrial interval: d = 1 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Mathematics Fact Fluency Interventions for Students With Mathematics Difficulties — Math fact fluency, overall: d = 0.76 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPeer Effects, Teacher Incentives, and the Impact of Tracking (Kenya RCT) — Tracking vs random assignment, total score: d = 0.139 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrPeer Effects, Teacher Incentives, and the Impact of Tracking (Kenya RCT) — Persistence, overall: d = 0.163 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrPeer Effects, Teacher Incentives, and the Impact of Tracking (Kenya RCT) — Direct peer effect in NON-tracking schools: d = 0.445 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Achievement, end of pre-K (reported here from Lipsey et al. 2018, not re-estimated in this paper): d = 0.236 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Achievement, end of kindergarten (from Lipsey et al. 2018): d = 0.019 · standardized · 1-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Grade 6 math: d = -0.178 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Grade 6 ELA: d = -0.128 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Grade 6 science: d = -0.132 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Special education (IEP) by grade 6: d = 11.7 (pinned to edge) · standardized · over-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Retention in grade by grade 6 — NULL (omitted from the record before): d = 87.2 (pinned to edge) · standardized · over-2yrEffects of a Statewide Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Sixth Grade — Grade 6 discipline — school-rule violations (cumulative K through 6): d = 23.1 (pinned to edge) · standardized · over-2yrSmartphone Bans, Student Outcomes and Mental Health — GPA, girls exposed from the start of middle school: d = 0.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSmartphone Bans, Student Outcomes and Mental Health — Externally graded (blind-marked) mathematics exam, girls: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSmartphone Bans, Student Outcomes and Mental Health — Reported bullying (school-level, compulsory national Pupil Survey): d = -0.25 · self-report · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — REDUCED FORM - 4th grade Maths test score, Tomorrow-98 schools vs other applicant schools: d = -0.204 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — REDUCED FORM - 4th grade Hebrew test score: d = -0.052 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — REDUCED FORM - 8th grade Maths and Hebrew test scores: d = 8 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — 2SLS - effect of a one-unit increase in CAI intensity on 4th grade Maths scores: d = -0.34 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — 2SLS - effect of CAI intensity on 4th grade Hebrew scores: d = -0.116 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew Evidence on Classroom Computers and Pupil Learning — OLS association between CAI intensity and test scores (the confounded estimate, for contrast): d = 0.047 · standardized · not-applicableRemedying Education: Evidence from Two Randomized Experiments in India — CAL — mathematics, first year of the programme (2002-03): d = 0.35 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRemedying Education: Evidence from Two Randomized Experiments in India — CAL — mathematics, second year of the programme (2003-04, treatment/comparison switched): d = 0.47 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRemedying Education: Evidence from Two Randomized Experiments in India — CAL — FADEOUT, mathematics one year after leaving the programme: d = 0.097 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrThe Use and Misuse of Computers in Education: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Colombia — Spanish (language), national SABER-derived test: d = 0.077 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Use and Misuse of Computers in Education: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Colombia — Mathematics, national SABER-derived test: d = 0.088 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTechnology's Edge: The Educational Benefits of Computer-Aided Instruction — Pre-algebra/algebra achievement, NWEA test commissioned for the study and aligned to the CAI curriculum - intent to treat: d = 0.173 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTechnology's Edge: The Educational Benefits of Computer-Aided Instruction — Pre-algebra/algebra achievement, aligned NWEA test - treatment on the treated (IV): d = 0.249 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentIll Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance — Age-16 high-stakes exam performance (total GCSE points), average effect of a school phone ban: d = 0.0641 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIll Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance — Age-16 exam performance, lowest quintile of prior (age-11) achievement: d = 0.1423 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIll Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance — Age-16 exam performance, highest quintile of prior achievement: d = -0.0254 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIll Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance — Gradient of the ban effect in prior achievement (ban x age-11 score interaction): d = -0.0604 · standardized · end-of-treatmentVirtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success — Grade in the course taken online (0-4 scale, A=4): d = -0.442 · standardized · end-of-treatmentVirtual Classrooms: How Online College Courses Affect Student Success — Grade point average in the NEXT term (the persistence result): d = -0.173 · standardized · under-1yrOne Laptop per Child at Home: Short-Term Impacts from a Randomized Experiment in Peru — XO-laptop proficiency (objective administered test): d = 0.88 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentOne Laptop per Child at Home: Short-Term Impacts from a Randomized Experiment in Peru — Raven's Progressive Matrices: d = 0.05 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHow features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis — Reading achievement, all 84 studies: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHow features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis — Supplemental CAI (the dominant classroom use): d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHow features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis — Comprehensive integrated models (READ 180, Writing to Read, Voyager Passport): d = 0.28 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHow features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis — Innovative technology applications (Fast ForWord, Reading Reels, Lightspan): d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHow features of educational technology applications affect student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis — Computer-managed learning (Accelerated Reader): d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis — Mathematics achievement, all 74 studies: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis — Supplemental CAI programmes (Jostens, PLATO, Larson, SRA Drill): d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis — Computer-managed learning (Accelerated Math): d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis — Comprehensive adaptive models (Cognitive Tutor, I Can Learn): d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis — Large randomized studies only (N > 250 and random assignment): d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentOnline Charter School Study 2015 — Annual growth in reading, online charter vs matched district-school virtual twin: d = -0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentOnline Charter School Study 2015 — Annual growth in mathematics, online charter vs matched district-school virtual twin: d = -0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentOnline Charter School Study 2015 — Pre-transfer growth trend - how much of this is selection: d = -0.06 · standardized · not-applicableTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Mathematics achievement: d = 0.046 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Language achievement: d = -0.039 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Average academic achievement (math + language): d = 0.003 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Raven's Progressive Matrices: d = 0.112 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Verbal fluency test (words beginning with a given letter, 3 minutes): d = 0.134 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Coding test (processing speed / working memory, 3 minutes): d = 0.086 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTechnology and Child Development: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program — Pooled index of general cognitive skills (Raven's + verbal fluency + coding): d = 0.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentLaptops in the Long Run: Evidence from the One Laptop per Child Program in Rural Peru — Pooled index of academic performance across all grades taken: d = -0.046 · standardized · over-2yrDon't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension — Reading comprehension, screen vs paper (between-participant designs): d = -0.21 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDon't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension — Reading comprehension, screen vs paper (within-participant designs): d = -0.21 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDon't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension — Change in the paper advantage over calendar time (publication-year meta-regression): d = -0.01 · mixed · not-applicableFrom Chalkboards to Chatbots: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Learning Outcomes in Nigeria — Total score on the programme's own end-of-intervention assessment (weighted): d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFrom Chalkboards to Chatbots: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Learning Outcomes in Nigeria — School's own third-term English exam (independently administered, whole-year content): d = 0.206 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFrom Chalkboards to Chatbots: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Learning Outcomes in Nigeria — English subscore of the programme's own assessment (the stated primary outcome of interest): d = 0.238 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFrom Chalkboards to Chatbots: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Learning Outcomes in Nigeria — IRT-scaled composite of the programme's own assessment: d = 0.263 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFrom Chalkboards to Chatbots: Evaluating the Impact of Generative AI on Learning Outcomes in Nigeria — Dose-response per day attended, and the extrapolation built on it: d = 0.033 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of ChatGPT's Influence on Learning Achievement — Overall effect of ChatGPT on learning achievement (random-effects pooled estimate): d = 0.573 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort — Grade 1 reading, SAT-9 overall score: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort — Grade 1 reading, Test of Word Reading Efficiency overall (individually administered fluency measure): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort — Grade 4 reading, SAT-10 overall score: d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort — Grade 6 mathematics, SAT-10 overall score: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort — Algebra, ETS End-of-Course Algebra Assessment overall score: d = -0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUpgrading Education with Technology: Insights from Experimental Research — Access to technology at POSTSECONDARY level: d = 0.137 · standardized · over-2yrUpgrading Education with Technology: Insights from Experimental Research — Computer-assisted learning (CAL) software, developed countries: d = 29 (pinned to edge) · mixed · end-of-treatmentExperimental Evidence on the Effects of Home Computers on Academic Achievement among Schoolchildren — Pooled academic z-score (grades + two test scores): d = -0.05 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffective and Scalable Math Support: Experimental Evidence on the Impact of an AI-Math Tutor in Ghana — Math growth score (endline minus baseline raw score), Rori vs regular instruction: d = 0.36 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Recovered second-semester Algebra I credit (primary outcome - grade of D or better): d = 66 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Algebra knowledge - 28-item study-administered posttest (Rasch-scaled): d = -0.19 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Perceived difficulty of the course: d = 0.51 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Clarity about what was needed to succeed in the class: d = -0.64 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Liking of and confidence in mathematics: d = -0.18 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Struggle to Pass Algebra: Online vs. Face-to-Face Credit Recovery for At-Risk Urban Students — Cumulative mathematics credits by end of second year of high school: d = 2.39 (pinned to edge) · standardized · 1-2yrThe impact of banning mobile phones in Swedish secondary schools — School-average merit points at end of grade 9 (national school-leaving grade): d = -0.034 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe impact of banning mobile phones in Swedish secondary schools — National standardized maths test score: d = -0.025 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: an RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting — Post-test score, AI tutor vs in-class active learning (linear regression with controls): d = 0.63 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: an RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting — Post-test score, AI tutor vs in-class active learning (quantile regression avoiding the ceiling): d = 0.73 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentZooming to Class? Experimental Evidence on College Students' Online Learning during COVID-19 — Final course grade: d = -0.215 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review — ITS effect measured on INDEPENDENT STANDARDIZED tests: d = 0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review — ITS effect measured on LOCAL researcher-developed tests: d = 0.73 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Meta-Analytic Review — K-12 mathematics subgroup, standardized measures only: d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo intelligent tutoring systems benefit K-12 students? A meta-analysis and evaluation of heterogeneity of treatment effects in the U.S. — ITS effect on US K-12 learning outcomes, overall: d = 0.271 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDo intelligent tutoring systems benefit K-12 students? A meta-analysis and evaluation of heterogeneity of treatment effects in the U.S. — Effect measured on standardized tests: d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo intelligent tutoring systems benefit K-12 students? A meta-analysis and evaluation of heterogeneity of treatment effects in the U.S. — Effect measured on researcher-developed tests: d = 0.483 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentIntelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis — ITS vs teacher-led LARGE-GROUP instruction: d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIntelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis — ITS vs SMALL-GROUP human instruction: d = 0.05 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIntelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis — ITS vs INDIVIDUALIZED HUMAN TUTORING: d = -0.11 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIntelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis — ITS vs textbooks or workbooks: d = 0.35 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIntelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis — ITS vs non-ITS computer-based instruction: d = 0.57 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHome Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital — Math school grade (GPA out of 10): d = -0.28 · standardized · under-1yrHome Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital — Romanian-language school grade: d = -0.33 · standardized · under-1yrHome Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital — English school grade: d = -0.31 · standardized · under-1yrHome Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital — Computer-skills test (administered) and self-reported computer fluency: d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · under-1yrHome Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital — Raven's Progressive Matrices: d = 0.146 · researcher-designed · under-1yrEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — All 50 contrasts - online or blended vs face-to-face instruction (THE HEADLINE THAT TRAVELLED): d = 0.2 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — PURELY ONLINE vs purely face-to-face (the substitution question): d = 0.05 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — BLENDED (online plus face-to-face) vs face-to-face alone: d = 0.35 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — Equivalence of curriculum and instruction across arms (the moderator that explains the headline): d = 0.13 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — K-12 learners (the caveat that should have travelled with the headline): d = 7 (pinned to edge) · mixed · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies — Time on task (2009 release only; superseded as a significant moderator in the 2010 revision): d = 0.46 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDisrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India — Mathematics, independent IRT-linked test: d = 0.37 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentDisrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India — Hindi (language), independent IRT-linked test: d = 0.23 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentDisrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India — Mathematics and Hindi, IV estimate for 90 days of attendance: d = 0.59 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentDisrupting Education? Experimental Evidence on Technology-Aided Instruction in India — SCALE-UP / EFFECTIVENESS: the same product delivered in government schools (Muralidharan & Singh 2025): d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAdapting for scale: Experimental Evidence on Technology-aided Instruction in India — Mathematics, 18 months (grades 1-8 pooled): d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAdapting for scale: Experimental Evidence on Technology-aided Instruction in India — Hindi (language), 18 months (grades 1-8 pooled): d = 0.2 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentInforming Progress: Insights on Personalized Learning Implementation and Effects — The same team's earlier estimates on a more experienced sample (Pane et al. 2015, "Continued Progress", RAND RR-1365): d = 0.27 · standardized · 1-2yrA Multisite Randomized Study of an Online Learning Approach to High School Credit Recovery: Effects on Student Experiences and Proximal Outcomes — Algebra 1 credit recovery rate: d = 62 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Multisite Randomized Study of an Online Learning Approach to High School Credit Recovery: Effects on Student Experiences and Proximal Outcomes — Algebra 1 end-of-course content knowledge (study-administered test): d = 0.15 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Multisite Randomized Study of an Online Learning Approach to High School Credit Recovery: Effects on Student Experiences and Proximal Outcomes — English 9 credit recovery rate: d = 52 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentLaptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers — Lecture comprehension test, laptop multitasker vs non-multitasker (Experiment 1): d = 0.55 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentLaptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers — Lecture comprehension test, in direct view of a multitasking peer vs not (Experiment 2): d = 0.56 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on K–12 students’ mathematical learning — K-12 mathematics achievement, ITS vs control: d = 0.01 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students’ academic learning — College academic learning, ITS vs all comparison conditions pooled: d = 0.32 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students’ academic learning — ITS vs a control receiving NO instruction: d = 0.86 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students’ academic learning — ITS vs conventional classroom instruction: d = 0.37 · mixed · end-of-treatmentRETRACTED ARTICLE: The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis — Learning performance (as reported before retraction): d = 0.867 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRETRACTED ARTICLE: The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis — Learning perception (as reported before retraction): d = 0.456 · self-report · end-of-treatmentRETRACTED ARTICLE: The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis — Higher-order thinking (as reported before retraction): d = 0.457 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — Overall academic achievement across pooled subjects: d = 0.16 · mixed · unclearLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — English / language arts: d = 0.15 · mixed · unclearLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — Writing: d = 0.2 · mixed · unclearLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — Mathematics: d = 0.17 · mixed · unclearLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — Science: d = 0.25 · mixed · unclearLearning in One-to-One Laptop Environments: A Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis — Reading: d = 0.12 · mixed · unclearFFT Reciprocal Reading: Efficacy Trial Evaluation Report (EEF) — Whole-class (Year 4) overall reading / comprehension: d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFFT Reciprocal Reading: Efficacy Trial Evaluation Report (EEF) — Targeted (Year 5-6) reading / comprehension: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRead Write Inc. Phonics and Fresh Start: Evaluation Report (EEF) — Read Write Inc. — NGRT standardised reading, end of Year 2 (primary): d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRead Write Inc. Phonics and Fresh Start: Evaluation Report (EEF) — Read Write Inc. — FSM (disadvantaged) subgroup, NGRT reading: d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRead Write Inc. Phonics and Fresh Start: Evaluation Report (EEF) — Fresh Start — KS2 reading, cohort 1 (Year 7 at end of trial, offered FS for one year): d = -0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRead Write Inc. Phonics and Fresh Start: Evaluation Report (EEF) — Fresh Start — KS2 reading, cohort 2 (Year 6 at end of trial, offered FS for two years): d = -0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPhonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children Learn to Read: Evidence From the NRP's Meta-Analysis — Phonemic awareness (the trained skill): d = 0.86 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children Learn to Read: Evidence From the NRP's Meta-Analysis — Reading: d = 0.53 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children Learn to Read: Evidence From the NRP's Meta-Analysis — Spelling: d = 0.59 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children Learn to Read: Evidence From the NRP's Meta-Analysis — Reading comprehension: d = 0.34 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Overall reading (end of training): d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Overall reading (end of training or end of first year): d = 0.44 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Reading (delayed follow-up, 4mo-1yr post) — the MATCHED fadeout comparison: d = 0.27 · mixed · under-1yrSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Reading comprehension (K-1 vs grades 2-6): d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Spelling (K-1 vs grades 2-6): d = 0.67 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSystematic Phonics Instruction Helps Students Learn to Read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel's Meta-Analysis — Oral reading of connected text — the outcome closest to reading itself: d = 0.23 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHow Effective Are One-to-One Tutoring Programs in Reading for At-Risk Students? A Meta-Analysis — Reading, overall: d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Importance of Relative Standards in ADHD Diagnoses: Evidence Based on Exact Birth Dates — Teacher-rated ADHD symptoms (peer-referenced): d = 0.59 · researcher-designed · not-applicableThe Importance of Relative Standards in ADHD Diagnoses: Evidence Based on Exact Birth Dates — Parent-rated ADHD symptoms (NOT peer-referenced): d = 0.14 · researcher-designed · not-applicableThe Impact of Vocabulary Instruction on Passage-Level Comprehension of School-Age Children: A Meta-Analysis — Passage comprehension (custom measures): d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Vocabulary Instruction on Passage-Level Comprehension of School-Age Children: A Meta-Analysis — Passage comprehension (standardized measures): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Vocabulary Instruction on Passage-Level Comprehension of School-Age Children: A Meta-Analysis — Comprehension (custom) - students WITH reading difficulties: d = 1.23 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of Interleaving as a Concept Learning Strategy — Interleaving vs blocking, MEMORY for studied items, within-participants designs (3 datasets): d = 0.65 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of Interleaving as a Concept Learning Strategy — Interleaving vs blocking, MEMORY for studied items, between-participants designs (3 datasets): d = 0.39 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of Interleaving as a Concept Learning Strategy — Interleaving vs blocking, TRANSFER to novel items, between-participants designs (13 datasets): d = 0.66 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of Interleaving as a Concept Learning Strategy — Interleaving vs blocking, TRANSFER to novel items, within-participants designs (13 datasets): d = 0.59 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis — Task-based language teaching programme implementation, pooled learning outcomes: d = 0.93 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis — L2 form-focused instruction vs control, target structures: d = 1.06 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Extensive Reading Research — Extensive reading vs control (group contrasts): d = 0.46 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Extensive Reading Research — Extensive reading, pre-post contrasts with no control group: d = 0.71 · mixed · end-of-treatmentLearning a Language Through Reading: A Meta-analysis of Studies on the Effects of Extensive Reading on Second and Foreign Language Learning — Extensive reading at PRIMARY level: d = 0.32 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffective Reading Programs for Spanish-Dominant English Language Learners (ELLs) in the Elementary Grades — ENGLISH reading, bilingual vs English-only instruction (pooled): d = 0.21 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — All outcome measures pooled, bilingual vs all-English programmes: d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — READING measured in ENGLISH, bilingual vs all-English programmes: d = -0.06 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — MATHEMATICS measured in ENGLISH, bilingual vs all-English programmes: d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — Studies comparing two ELL groups (controlling for ELL status), all outcomes and both languages pooled - the source of the widely quoted "+0.23": d = 0.23 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — Studies comparing language-minority students with language-MAJORITY students: d = 0.05 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — NATIVE-LANGUAGE outcomes, bilingual vs all-English programmes: d = 0.86 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — All TRANSITIONAL bilingual education (TBE) studies: d = -0.01 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — All DEVELOPMENTAL bilingual education (DBE) studies: d = 0.18 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language Learners — Researcher effect - overall pooled estimate with one author's studies removed: d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Synthesis of Research on Language of Reading Instruction for English Language Learners — ENGLISH reading, bilingual vs English-only instruction, sample-weighted: d = 0.33 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Dual-Language Immersion Programs on Student Achievement: Evidence From Lottery Data — ENGLISH reading achievement, grade 5 (OAKS state test): d = 0.13 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of Dual-Language Immersion Programs on Student Achievement: Evidence From Lottery Data — ENGLISH reading achievement, grade 8 (OAKS state test): d = 0.22 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of Four Instructional Programs Designed to Serve English Learners: Variation by Ethnicity and Initial English Proficiency — ENGLISH Language Arts growth, Dual Immersion vs English Immersion (Model 4): d = 0.064 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of Four Instructional Programs Designed to Serve English Learners: Variation by Ethnicity and Initial English Proficiency — ENGLISH Language Arts growth, Transitional Bilingual vs English Immersion (Model 4): d = 0.023 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of Four Instructional Programs Designed to Serve English Learners: Variation by Ethnicity and Initial English Proficiency — ENGLISH Language Arts growth, Developmental Bilingual vs English Immersion (Model 4): d = -0.022 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of Four Instructional Programs Designed to Serve English Learners: Variation by Ethnicity and Initial English Proficiency — 2nd-grade ELA starting level, Dual Immersion vs English Immersion (Model 4): d = -0.191 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of Four Instructional Programs Designed to Serve English Learners: Variation by Ethnicity and Initial English Proficiency — Mathematics growth, Developmental Bilingual vs English Immersion (Model 4): d = -0.042 · standardized · over-2yrLong-Term Effects of Class Size (Swedish RD, grades 4-6) — Cognitive skills at 13 (verbal antonyms + number series, "IQ-type" battery): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLong-Term Effects of Class Size (Swedish RD, grades 4-6) — Non-cognitive skills at 13 (self-confidence, persistence, self-security, expectations index): d = 0.017 · self-report · end-of-treatmentLong-Term Effects of Class Size (Swedish RD, grades 4-6) — Academic achievement at 16 (maths, Swedish, English, end of lower secondary): d = 0.02 · standardized · over-2yrLong-Term Effects of Class Size (Swedish RD, grades 4-6) — General ability at 18 (AFQT-like enlistment battery), men only: d = 0.018 · standardized · over-2yrLong-Term Effects of Class Size (Swedish RD, grades 4-6) — Non-cognitive ability at 18 (psychologist enlistment interview), men only: d = 0.017 · standardized · over-2yrInjecting Charter School Best Practices into Traditional Public Schools (Houston field experiment) — Math, headline effect per year (state tests): d = 0.206 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInjecting Charter School Best Practices into Traditional Public Schools (Houston field experiment) — Reading (state tests): d = 0.043 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInjecting Charter School Best Practices into Traditional Public Schools (Houston field experiment) — The grades where ALL FIVE policies were implemented (4th, 6th and 9th grade math): d = 4 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of First-Grade Number Knowledge Tutoring With Contrasting Forms of Practice — Arithmetic (1-min timed): speeded vs nonspeeded (head-to-head): d = 0.51 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of First-Grade Number Knowledge Tutoring With Contrasting Forms of Practice — More complex 2-digit calculations (5-min timed): speeded vs nonspeeded: d = 0.21 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of First-Grade Number Knowledge Tutoring With Contrasting Forms of Practice — Number knowledge (Number Sets Test): speeded vs nonspeeded: d = 0.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of First-Grade Number Knowledge Tutoring With Contrasting Forms of Practice — Word problems: speeded vs nonspeeded: d = 0.04 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentExperimental and Quasi-Experimental Studies of Inquiry-Based Science Teaching: A Meta-Analysis — Inquiry-based vs traditional science instruction: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Phonics instruction, reading (all 22 trials): d = 0.322 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Phonics instruction, reading — publication-bias-corrected: d = 0.198 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Phonics instruction, reading — standardized measures only (19 trials): d = 0.424 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Phonics instruction, spelling: d = 0.336 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Phonemic awareness instruction, reading: d = 0.279 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Reading fluency training, reading: d = 0.301 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Reading comprehension training, reading: d = 0.177 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Auditory training, reading: d = 0.387 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Medical treatment (piracetam), reading: d = 0.125 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials — Coloured overlays / Irlen lenses, reading: d = 0.316 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Grade-1 decoding, Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency (spring 2007 only): d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Reading comprehension, grade 1 (SAT-10 scaled score, pooled 2005-2007): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Reading comprehension, grade 2 (SAT-10 scaled score, pooled 2005-2007): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Reading comprehension, grade 3 (SAT-10 scaled score, pooled 2005-2007): d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Instructional time on the five essential components, grade 1 (teacher behaviour): d = 0.33 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Instructional time on the five essential components, grade 2 (teacher behaviour): d = 0.46 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Highly explicit instruction, grades 1 / 2 (proportion of observed intervals): d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading First Impact Study: Final Report (NCEE 2009-4038) — Student engagement with print, grades 1 / 2: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Instructional Components — Explicit instruction component: d = 1.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Instructional Components — Teaching heuristics: d = 1.56 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentIntervention for First Graders With Limited Number Knowledge: Large-Scale Replication RCT (Number Rockets) — Broad early math proficiency (TEMA-3): d = 0.34 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIntervention for First Graders With Limited Number Knowledge: Large-Scale Replication RCT (Number Rockets) — NULL: differential effect by baseline mathematics proficiency: d = 0.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Evaluation of Charter School Impacts: Final Report — Heterogeneity by urbanicity: d = 0.16 · standardized · 1-2yrCognitive Training: A Field in Search of a Phenomenon — Far transfer, uncorrected (naive) second-order grand mean across 10 training literatures: d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCognitive Training: A Field in Search of a Phenomenon — Far transfer, corrected (ACTIVE control groups only): d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Universal Pre-K on Cognitive Development — WJ Letter-Word Identification: d = 0.79 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Universal Pre-K on Cognitive Development — WJ Spelling: d = 0.64 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Universal Pre-K on Cognitive Development — WJ Applied Problems: d = 0.38 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Long-Term Effects of Universal Preschool in Boston — High-school disciplinary summary index: d = 0.172 · standardized · over-2yrFadeout and Persistence of Intervention Impacts on Social-Emotional and Cognitive Skills in Children and Adolescents — Intercept — follow-up effects NOT mediated by the post-test impact: d = 0.07 · mixed · 1-2yrImpact of a content-rich literacy curriculum on kindergarteners' vocabulary, listening comprehension, and content knowledge — Social studies content knowledge - PROXIMAL (curriculum-specific, Native Americans): d = 0.93 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpact of a content-rich literacy curriculum on kindergarteners' vocabulary, listening comprehension, and content knowledge — Social studies content knowledge - STANDARDIZED (Woodcock-Johnson Social Studies): d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImpact of a content-rich literacy curriculum on kindergarteners' vocabulary, listening comprehension, and content knowledge — Interaction with entering vocabulary (Matthew effect): d = 0.53 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Longitudinal Randomized Trial of a Sustained Content Literacy Intervention from First to Second Grade: Transfer Effects on Students' Reading Comprehension — Science content reading comprehension, end of grade 2: d = 0.18 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTime to transfer: Long-term effects of a sustained and spiraled content literacy intervention in the elementary grades — Domain-general reading comprehension, grade 3: d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTime to transfer: Long-term effects of a sustained and spiraled content literacy intervention in the elementary grades — Reading comprehension, grade 4 (14-month follow-up): d = 0.12 · standardized · 1-2yrTime to transfer: Long-term effects of a sustained and spiraled content literacy intervention in the elementary grades — Science reading, grade 3: d = 0.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTime to transfer: Long-term effects of a sustained and spiraled content literacy intervention in the elementary grades — Mathematics achievement (unpredicted by the knowledge-transfer mechanism): d = 0.12 · standardized · 1-2yrPromoting adolescents' comprehension of text: A randomized control trial of its effectiveness — US history content knowledge (ASK-MC), sample average treatment effect: d = 0.46 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPromoting adolescents' comprehension of text: A randomized control trial of its effectiveness — Content-area reading comprehension (ASK-RC): d = 0.15 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPromoting adolescents' comprehension of text: A randomized control trial of its effectiveness — Broad reading comprehension (Gates-MacGinitie, standardized): d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPromoting Acceleration of Comprehension and Content Through Text in High School Social Studies Classes — US history content acquisition, posttest: d = 0.36 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPromoting Acceleration of Comprehension and Content Through Text in High School Social Studies Classes — US history content acquisition, delayed: d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · under-1yrImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge Among Middle School Students With Disabilities — Content knowledge acquisition, students with disabilities: d = 0.26 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge Among Middle School Students With Disabilities — Content-area reading comprehension, students with disabilities: d = 0.34 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge Among Middle School Students With Disabilities — Standardized reading comprehension, students with disabilities: d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSocial Studies Instruction and Reading Comprehension: Evidence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study — Fifth-grade reading, per 30 extra daily minutes of SOCIAL STUDIES in grades 1-5: d = 0.15 · standardized · over-2yrSocial Studies Instruction and Reading Comprehension: Evidence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study — Social studies time effect by family income quartile: d = 0.17 · standardized · over-2yrImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge in Middle School — Broad reading comprehension (Gates-MacGinitie, 4th ed.): d = 0.21 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge in Middle School — Content-area reading comprehension (ASK-RC subtest): d = 0.35 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Reading Comprehension and Social Studies Knowledge in Middle School — US history content knowledge (ASK knowledge acquisition subtest): d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Middle-School Students' Knowledge and Comprehension in Social Studies: a Replication — US history content acquisition (ASK), posttest: d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Middle-School Students' Knowledge and Comprehension in Social Studies: a Replication — US history content acquisition (ASK), delayed: d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · under-1yrImproving Middle-School Students' Knowledge and Comprehension in Social Studies: a Replication — Content-area reading comprehension (ASK): d = 0.02 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImproving Middle-School Students' Knowledge and Comprehension in Social Studies: a Replication — Broad (standardized) reading comprehension (Gates-MacGinitie): d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Team-Based Learning on Social Studies Knowledge Acquisition in High School — US history content acquisition (team-based learning components only): d = 0.19 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Team-Based Learning on Social Studies Knowledge Acquisition in High School — Broad (standardized) reading comprehension (Gates-MacGinitie): d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLearning Historical Thinking With Oral History Interviews: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Intervention Study of Oral History Interviews in History Lessons — Factual knowledge about the taught topic: d = 1.46 · researcher-designed · under-1yrLearning Historical Thinking With Oral History Interviews: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Intervention Study of Oral History Interviews in History Lessons — Understanding deconstruction (critical interrogation of a source as constructed narrative): d = 0.01 · researcher-designed · under-1yrLearning Historical Thinking With Oral History Interviews: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Intervention Study of Oral History Interviews in History Lessons — Understanding reconstruction: d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · under-1yrLearning Historical Thinking With Oral History Interviews: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Intervention Study of Oral History Interviews in History Lessons — Understanding oral history as a source type: d = 0.3 · researcher-designed · under-1yrA Historical Writing Apprenticeship for Adolescents: Integrating Disciplinary Learning With Cognitive Strategies — Historical argument writing quality (basic readers): d = 0.45 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Historical Writing Apprenticeship for Adolescents: Integrating Disciplinary Learning With Cognitive Strategies — Overall writing quality (basic readers): d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Historical Writing Apprenticeship for Adolescents: Integrating Disciplinary Learning With Cognitive Strategies — Essay length (basic readers): d = 0.6 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentJudging a text by its author — A meta-analysis of interventions to foster source credibility assessment — Source credibility assessment, all interventions pooled: d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentJudging a text by its author — A meta-analysis of interventions to foster source credibility assessment — Historical reasoning approach specifically: d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentJudging a text by its author — A meta-analysis of interventions to foster source credibility assessment — Lateral reading approach specifically: d = 0.55 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentJudging a text by its author — A meta-analysis of interventions to foster source credibility assessment — Actual credibility judgments (as against knowledge or search behaviour): d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentJudging a text by its author — A meta-analysis of interventions to foster source credibility assessment — Secondary-education subgroup (the age band relevant to this archive): d = 0.46 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentExamining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis — Combined literacy outcomes, family-implemented instruction (group designs): d = 0.36 · mixed · end-of-treatmentExamining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis — Combined literacy outcomes (single-case experimental designs): d = 1.5 · mixed · end-of-treatmentExamining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis — Code-focused outcomes (phonological awareness, decoding, spelling, text reading), group designs: d = 0.28 · mixed · end-of-treatmentExamining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis — Meaning-focused outcomes (vocabulary, listening and reading comprehension), group designs: d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentLearning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic — Primary-school achievement across an 8-week home-learning period: d = -3.16 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentParent Tutoring: A Meta-Analysis — Academic achievement, parent-delivered tutoring — group designs: d = 0.55 · mixed · end-of-treatmentShould we Help our Children With Homework? A Meta-Analysis Using PISA Data — Family help with homework and academic achievement, pooled: d = 0.23 · standardized · not-applicableEffects of Family Literacy Programs on the Emergent Literacy Skills of Children From Low-SES Families: A Meta-Analysis — Emergent literacy, immediate posttest: d = 0.5 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Family Literacy Programs on the Emergent Literacy Skills of Children From Low-SES Families: A Meta-Analysis — Emergent literacy, follow-up: d = 0.16 · mixed · unclearThe effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis — Parent use of language-facilitating behaviours (the intervention's proximal target): d = 1.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis — Child expressive vocabulary: d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis — Child expressive language: d = 0.27 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis — Child receptive vocabulary: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis — Child receptive language: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAdded Value of Dialogic Parent–Child Book Readings: A Meta-Analysis — Overall vocabulary, dialogic reading vs reading-as-usual: d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAdded Value of Dialogic Parent–Child Book Readings: A Meta-Analysis — Expressive vocabulary, dialogic reading vs reading-as-usual: d = 0.59 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAdded Value of Dialogic Parent–Child Book Readings: A Meta-Analysis — Receptive vocabulary, dialogic reading vs reading-as-usual: d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAdded Value of Dialogic Parent–Child Book Readings: A Meta-Analysis — Age moderator — kindergarten (older) children, overall vocabulary: d = 0.14 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAdded Value of Dialogic Parent–Child Book Readings: A Meta-Analysis — Risk-status moderator — children at risk for language and literacy impairment: d = 0.13 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Impressive Effects of Tutoring on PreK-12 Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence — Parent-delivered tutoring, pooled effect on standardized test scores: d = 0.23 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impressive Effects of Tutoring on PreK-12 Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence — Parent tutoring delivered after school: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentApproaches to Parent Involvement for Improving the Academic Performance of Elementary School Age Children — Academic performance, parent-involvement programmes vs control: d = 0.45 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Nationwide Study on the Academic Achievement of Homeschool Students and Parents’ Reasons for Homeschooling — The same norm-group comparison expressed as an effect size: d = 0.736 · standardized · not-applicableThe Effectiveness of Parent-Implemented Language Interventions: A Meta-Analysis — Child language outcomes, parent-implemented intervention: d = -0.15 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Family Literacy Interventions on Children's Acquisition of Reading From Kindergarten to Grade 3: A Meta-Analytic Review — Parents tutoring children on specific literacy skills: d = 1.15 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Family Literacy Interventions on Children's Acquisition of Reading From Kindergarten to Grade 3: A Meta-Analytic Review — Parents listening to their children read: d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Family Literacy Interventions on Children's Acquisition of Reading From Kindergarten to Grade 3: A Meta-Analytic Review — Parents reading to their children: d = 0.18 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Family Literacy Interventions on Children's Acquisition of Reading From Kindergarten to Grade 3: A Meta-Analytic Review — Overall pooled effect across all intervention types: d = 0.65 · mixed · end-of-treatmentHow Effective Are Family Literacy Programs? Results of a Meta-Analysis — General literacy ability, family literacy programmes vs control: d = 0.18 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Causal Role of Phoneme Awareness and Letter-Sound Knowledge in Learning to Read: Combining Intervention Studies With Mediation Analyses — Word-level literacy composite (P+R vs Oral-Language), unadjusted: d = 0.49 · mixed · under-1yrThe Causal Role of Phoneme Awareness and Letter-Sound Knowledge in Learning to Read: Combining Intervention Studies With Mediation Analyses — Total indirect (mediated) effect on literacy at Time 4: d = 0.4 · mixed · under-1yrThe Causal Role of Phoneme Awareness and Letter-Sound Knowledge in Learning to Read: Combining Intervention Studies With Mediation Analyses — Mediated path via phoneme awareness: d = 0.31 · mixed · under-1yrThe Causal Role of Phoneme Awareness and Letter-Sound Knowledge in Learning to Read: Combining Intervention Studies With Mediation Analyses — Mediated path via letter-sound knowledge: d = 0.09 · mixed · under-1yrReading intervention at age 6: Long-term effects of Reading Recovery in the UK on qualifications and support at age 16 — GCSE new points score: RR vs comparison schools: d = 0.52 · standardized · over-2yrReading intervention at age 6: Long-term effects of Reading Recovery in the UK on qualifications and support at age 16 — GCSE new points score: RRS (untutored weak readers in the SAME Reading Recovery schools) vs comparison schools: d = 0.37 · standardized · over-2yrReading intervention at age 6: Long-term effects of Reading Recovery in the UK on qualifications and support at age 16 — GCSE new points score, "bottom four readers per school" matched grouping: RR vs CS: d = 0.36 · standardized · over-2yrAssessing Impacts of Math in Focus, a "Singapore Math" Program — SAT 10 Problem Solving (primary outcome), regression-adjusted: d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing Impacts of Math in Focus, a "Singapore Math" Program — SAT 10 Procedures (secondary), regression-adjusted: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing Impacts of Math in Focus, a "Singapore Math" Program — Nevada state accountability test (CRT), same students, regression-adjusted: d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAssessing Impacts of Math in Focus, a "Singapore Math" Program — Unadjusted (raw) effect sizes on all three measures: d = -0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhat Impacts Can We Expect from School Spending Policy? Evidence from Evaluations in the United States — $1,000 per pupil sustained four years — test scores: d = 0.0352 · standardized · over-2yrWhat Impacts Can We Expect from School Spending Policy? Evidence from Evaluations in the United States — $1,000 per pupil sustained four years — educational attainment: d = 0.0539 · standardized · adulthoodMathematics Mastery (Ark): EEF primary and secondary cluster RCTs — Primary (Year 1) math: d = 0.099 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMathematics Mastery (Ark): EEF primary and secondary cluster RCTs — Secondary (Year 7) math: d = 0.055 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMathematics Mastery (Ark): EEF primary and secondary cluster RCTs — Pooled (both trials, equal weight): d = 0.073 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Mental practice vs no practice, ACQUISITION: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Physical practice vs no practice, ACQUISITION: d = 1.78 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Combined (physical + mental) vs no practice, ACQUISITION: d = 1.16 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Physical vs mental practice head-to-head, ACQUISITION: d = -1.16 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Physical vs mental practice head-to-head, RETENTION — NULL (cuts against the acquisition result): d = -1.29 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · unclearPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Physical vs mental practice head-to-head, TRANSFER: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · unclearPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Combined vs physical practice alone, ACQUISITION — NULL: d = -0.01 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Combined vs physical practice alone, RETENTION — NULL: d = 0.16 · researcher-designed · unclearPhysical practice, mental practice or both: a systematic review with meta-analysis — Combined vs mental practice alone, ACQUISITION: d = 0.61 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Schema-Based Instruction for Improving Seventh-Grade Students' Proportional Reasoning: A Randomized Experiment — Proportional problem solving — AS REPORTED (between-classroom denominator): d = 1.24 · researcher-designed · under-1yrEffects of a research-based intervention to improve seventh-grade students' proportional problem solving: A cluster randomized trial — Proportional problem solving (researcher-built PPS measure), posttest — AS REPORTED: d = 0.46 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of a research-based intervention to improve seventh-grade students' proportional problem solving: A cluster randomized trial — Proportional problem solving, posttest — RECOMPUTED on the conventional total-SD denominator: d = 0.33 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of a research-based intervention to improve seventh-grade students' proportional problem solving: A cluster randomized trial — Proportional problem solving, 9-week delayed posttest — AS REPORTED: d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · under-1yrEffects of a research-based intervention to improve seventh-grade students' proportional problem solving: A cluster randomized trial — Proportional problem solving, 9-week delayed posttest — RECOMPUTED on the conventional total-SD denominator: d = 0.24 · researcher-designed · under-1yrTeaching Higher / textbook-effects high-water mark (and its non-survival) — 1 SD of textbook effectiveness (2016 estimate): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEstimating Teacher Impacts on Student Achievement: An Experimental Evaluation — Magnitude of teacher effects (pre-experimental, preferred specification): d = 0.219 · standardized · not-applicableA meta-analysis of the experimental evidence on the near- and far-transfer effects among children's executive function skills — Direct within-study comparison of near vs far transfer: d = 0.28 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFormative Assessment: A Meta-Analysis and a Call for Research (with the Briggs et al. 2012 / McMillan et al. 2013 critiques) — Achievement, overall: d = 0.2 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPrenatal and Infancy Nurse Home Visiting and 18-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial — Math achievement, full sample: d = 0.15 · standardized · adulthoodPrenatal and Infancy Nurse Home Visiting and 18-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial — Math achievement, low-psychological-resources SUBGROUP (pre-specified moderator): d = 0.38 · standardized · adulthoodPrenatal and Infancy Nurse Home Visiting and 18-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial — Receptive language, LPR subgroup: d = 0.24 · standardized · adulthoodEvaluating Public Programs with Close Substitutes: The Case of Head Start — Head Start vs HOME care (sub-LATE): d = 0.37 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Overall performance from feedback interventions (all 607 effects): d = 0.41 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Overall performance after ALL exclusions (Mikulincer's 91 effects, 5% trimming at each tail, and the 17 time-series quasi-d effects removed; 470 effects): d = 0.38 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Sensitivity to the independence violation - Mikulincer's 91 effects vs the rest of the corpus: d = -0.39 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Correct-solution information present vs absent: d = 0.43 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Change-from-prior-trials (velocity) info: d = 0.55 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Praise cues present vs absent: d = 0.09 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Discouraging feedback: d = -0.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — High threat to self-esteem (top vs bottom quartile): d = 0.08 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Very complex tasks (top vs bottom quartile): d = 0.03 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory — Physical tasks (a negative-mean subgroup the record previously omitted): d = -0.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMathematics Curriculum Effects on Student Achievement in California — California Math (the practice-heavy option) vs a composite of three rival texts, GRADE 3: d = 0.05 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of Interim Assessments Across the Achievement Distribution — MATHEMATICS, grades 3-8, TOT across quantiles (10th/25th/50th/75th/90th): d = 0.227 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments Across the Achievement Distribution — MATHEMATICS, all grades K-8 pooled, TOT across quantiles: d = 0.158 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments Across the Achievement Distribution — MATHEMATICS, grades K-2 only, TOT across quantiles: d = 0.023 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments Across the Achievement Distribution — READING, grades 3-8, TOT across quantiles: d = 0.135 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments Across the Achievement Distribution — READING, grades K-2 only, TOT across quantiles: d = -0.018 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments on Student Achievement: Evidence From a Large-Scale Experiment — Mathematics achievement, grades 3-8 (ITT): d = 0.186 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments on Student Achievement: Evidence From a Large-Scale Experiment — Mathematics achievement, K-8 (ITT): d = 0.074 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Interim Assessments on Student Achievement: Evidence From a Large-Scale Experiment — Mathematics achievement, K-2 (ITT): d = 0.045 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Scaling Dynamics and Causal Effects of a District-Operated Tutoring Program (Metro Nashville) — Reading, difference-in-differences (the headline): d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Scaling Dynamics and Causal Effects of a District-Operated Tutoring Program (Metro Nashville) — Reading, cluster RCT (first scale-up semester): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Scaling Dynamics and Causal Effects of a District-Operated Tutoring Program (Metro Nashville) — Reading, event study — the dosage signal: d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Scaling Dynamics and Causal Effects of a District-Operated Tutoring Program (Metro Nashville) — Math: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence — Student achievement, pooled (all subjects): d = 0.178 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence — Achievement on STATE STANDARDIZED tests only (the measure-type discount): d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Teacher Coaching on Instruction and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence — Teacher instruction (classroom observation): d = 0.488 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentWhat Impacts Should We Expect from Tutoring at Scale? Exploring Meta-Analytic Generalizability — Full sample pooled: d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat Impacts Should We Expect from Tutoring at Scale? Exploring Meta-Analytic Generalizability — VIRTUAL / online tutoring: d = 0.07 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat Impacts Should We Expect from Tutoring at Scale? Exploring Meta-Analytic Generalizability — Target-aligned (US + standardized + at scale): d = 0.21 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Mastery Learning Programs: A Meta-Analysis — Final exam, all studies: d = 0.52 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Mastery Learning Programs: A Meta-Analysis — Follow-up/retention examination: d = 0.71 · mixed · under-1yrMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Guidance effect on learning outcomes (posttests) — overall: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Learning outcomes — INQUIRY SKILLS subset: d = 0.78 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Learning outcomes — DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE subset: d = 0.37 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Guidance effect on performance success (products made DURING the inquiry): d = 0.71 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Guidance effect on learning activities (inquiry skill use during the task): d = 0.66 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance — Mathematics subset of learning outcomes: d = 0.28 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of the Tennessee Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Third Grade — WJ Composite, end of pre-K: d = 0.236 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of the Tennessee Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Third Grade — WJ Composite, end of kindergarten: d = 0.019 · standardized · under-1yrEffects of the Tennessee Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Third Grade — WJ Quantitative Concepts, grade 2: d = -0.123 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of the Tennessee Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Third Grade — WJ Composite, grade 3: d = -0.07 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of the Tennessee Prekindergarten Program on Children's Achievement and Behavior Through Third Grade — The one subtest that did NOT fade: WJ Picture Vocabulary at end of kindergarten: d = 0.13 · standardized · under-1yrChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading, age 5 (end of treatment): d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading, age 7: d = 0.07 · standardized · 1-2yrChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading, age 11 (whole population): d = 0 · standardized · over-2yrChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading age 11, FSM (disadvantaged) pupils: d = 0.06 · standardized · over-2yrChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading age 11, most-disadvantaged group (non-native English speaker AND FSM-eligible): d = 0.18 · standardized · over-2yrChanging How Literacy Is Taught: Evidence on Synthetic Phonics — Reading age 11, NON-disadvantaged pupils in pilot schools: d = -0.06 · standardized · over-2yrBetter Together? Heterogeneous Effects of Tracking on Student Achievement — Two extra comprehensive years vs tracking at ~age 10 — grade 7 achievement: d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Distributed Practice Effect on Classroom Learning: A Meta-Analytic Review of Applied Research — Distributed vs massed in real classrooms (longest retention interval): d = 0.54 · mixed · under-1yrThe Distributed Practice Effect on Classroom Learning: A Meta-Analytic Review of Applied Research — Sensitivity to analytic choices: d = 0.54 · mixed · under-1yrReading Recovery: An Evaluation of the Four-Year i3 Scale-Up — ITBS Reading Total (confirmatory outcome, independent standardized test): d = 3.41 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentReading Recovery: An Evaluation of the Four-Year i3 Scale-Up — Observation Survey Total - the PROGRAMME'S OWN aligned instrument: d = 43.49 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentReading Recovery: An Evaluation of the Four-Year i3 Scale-Up — End-of-grade-1 Observation Survey, RD sample (5 months post-treatment): d = 12 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · under-1yrReading Recovery: An Evaluation of the Four-Year i3 Scale-Up — Internal RD replication of the immediate effect (separate sample of i3 schools): d = 29.7 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Non-word reading accuracy: d = 0.67 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Mixed/regular word reading accuracy: d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Irregular word reading accuracy: d = 0.84 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Mixed/regular word reading FLUENCY: d = 0.45 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Non-word reading FLUENCY: d = 0.39 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Reading comprehension: d = 0.28 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Spelling: d = 0.47 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Letter-sound knowledge (secondary outcome): d = 0.35 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPhonics Training for English-Speaking Poor Readers (Cochrane Review) — Phonological output (secondary outcome): d = 0.38 · mixed · end-of-treatmentImpacts of Early Childhood Education on Medium- and Long-Term Educational Outcomes — Special education placement: d = 0.33 · mixed · over-2yrImpacts of Early Childhood Education on Medium- and Long-Term Educational Outcomes — Grade retention: d = 0.26 · mixed · over-2yrImpacts of Early Childhood Education on Medium- and Long-Term Educational Outcomes — High school graduation: d = 0.24 · mixed · adulthoodImpacts of Early Childhood Education on Medium- and Long-Term Educational Outcomes — High school graduation at the LATEST available timepoint — the sensitivity analysis that halves the headline: d = 0.1 · mixed · adulthoodMeta-analysis of the reduced relative feedback frequency effect on motor learning and performance — Acquisition performance: d = 0.19 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-analysis of the reduced relative feedback frequency effect on motor learning and performance — Immediate retention: d = 0.01 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMeta-analysis of the reduced relative feedback frequency effect on motor learning and performance — Delayed retention (the guidance hypothesis's home ground): d = 0.19 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPhonological Skills and Their Role in Learning to Read: A Meta-Analytic Review — Dyslexics vs reading-level-matched controls (PA deficit persists): d = -0.57 · standardized · not-applicableWorking Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of "Far Transfer": Evidence From a Meta-Analytic Review — Criterion measure (the trained task itself): d = 0.8 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of "Far Transfer": Evidence From a Meta-Analytic Review — Nonverbal ability (the headline far-transfer claim), immediate posttest: d = 0.05 · standardized · under-1yrIs working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review — VERBAL working memory (near transfer), immediate: d = 0.79 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review — VERBAL working memory at follow-up (mean 9 months): d = 0.31 · standardized · under-1yrIs working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review — NONVERBAL ability (far transfer): d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review — ATTENTIONAL INHIBITION (Stroop) — the one far-transfer effect that is nominally significant: d = 0.32 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFundamental movement skill interventions in youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Overall gross motor proficiency: d = 1.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFundamental movement skill interventions in youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Locomotor skill competency: d = 1.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFundamental movement skill interventions in youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Object control skill competency: d = 0.63 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhich Instructional Practices Most Help First-Grade Students With and Without Mathematics Difficulties? — Teacher-directed instruction (drill/practice/worksheets), MD students: d = 0.05 · standardized · not-applicableNear and far transfer: Is music special? — Sala & Gobet's dataset reanalysed with mismatched near-transfer control outcomes and post-test-only studies removed: d = 0.234 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNear and far transfer: Is music special? — Music training's far transfer versus language training's near transfer on the same tests: d = -0.126 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIt's all in your head: A meta-analysis on the effects of music training on cognitive measures in schoolchildren — Cognitive measures, naive pooled effect: d = 0.28 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIt's all in your head: A meta-analysis on the effects of music training on cognitive measures in schoolchildren — Studies with active control groups: d = 0.21 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIt's all in your head: A meta-analysis on the effects of music training on cognitive measures in schoolchildren — After adjustment for methodological quality: d = 0.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFirst Thing Music: Evaluation Report — Reading attainment (Progress in Reading Assessment): d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFirst Thing Music: Evaluation Report — Reading attainment, free-school-meal subgroup: d = 0 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes Music Training Enhance Literacy Skills? A Meta-Analysis — Phonological awareness (all measures): d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes Music Training Enhance Literacy Skills? A Meta-Analysis — Reading fluency: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes music training improve inhibition control in children? A systematic review and meta-analysis — Inhibition control, randomised trials with non-musical ACTIVE controls: d = 0.6 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes music training improve inhibition control in children? A systematic review and meta-analysis — Inhibition control, all 22 longitudinal controlled studies: d = 0.31 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTwo Randomized Trials Provide No Consistent Evidence for Nonmusical Cognitive Benefits of Brief Preschool Music Enrichment — Experiment 1: map use / spatial navigation, music versus visual arts: d = 65.9 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTwo Randomized Trials Provide No Consistent Evidence for Nonmusical Cognitive Benefits of Brief Preschool Music Enrichment — Experiment 1: visual form analysis, music versus visual arts: d = 40.6 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPlease don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence — Cognitive and academic outcomes pooled, randomised + non-randomised (outliers removed): d = 0.26 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPlease don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence — Randomised samples only (m = 8): d = 0.26 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPlease don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence — Randomised samples with an ACTIVE control group - the cleanest design cell: d = 0.23 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPlease don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence — Pre-existing advantage of children who CHOSE music, before any training (self-selection studies): d = 0.29 · standardized · not-applicableWhen the music's over. Does music skill transfer to children's and young adolescents' cognitive and academic skills? A meta-analysis — All cognitive and academic outcomes pooled: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhen the music's over. Does music skill transfer to children's and young adolescents' cognitive and academic skills? A meta-analysis — Randomised allocation AND active control - the strictest design cell: d = -0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCognitive and academic benefits of music training with children: A multilevel meta-analysis — All cognitive and academic outcomes, naive pooled: d = 0.184 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCognitive and academic benefits of music training with children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Studies with NON-ACTIVE (do-nothing) control groups: d = 0.228 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCognitive and academic benefits of music training with children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Studies with ACTIVE control groups - the load-bearing comparison: d = 0.056 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of instruction on the singing ability of children ages 5 to 11: A meta-analysis — Singing ability (pitch-matching and song accuracy): d = 0.43 · standardized · end-of-treatmentTowards evidence-based music teaching and learning: A meta-analysis — Musical-artistic outcomes overall: d = 0.56 · unknown · end-of-treatmentTowards evidence-based music teaching and learning: A meta-analysis — Music literacy and sight-reading: d = 0.54 · unknown · end-of-treatmentTowards evidence-based music teaching and learning: A meta-analysis — Performance and aural skills: d = 0.51 · unknown · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — Phonological awareness (all code-focused): d = 0.82 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — Reading/decoding (all code-focused): d = 0.44 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — READING: PA-training-ONLY (no print): d = 0.19 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — READING: PA + phonics training: d = 0.66 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — Alphabet knowledge: PA-training-ONLY: d = 0.04 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDeveloping Early Literacy: NELP Report, Ch. 3 - Impact of Code-Focused Interventions on Young Children's Early Literacy Skills — COGNITIVE ABILITY — the one negative in the whole table: d = -0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentLong-Term Impacts of a Full-Year Interleaved Mathematics Program (NewGlobe/Bridge, Nigeria) — Interleaved vs blocked, short-term retention: d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentLong-Term Impacts of a Full-Year Interleaved Mathematics Program (NewGlobe/Bridge, Nigeria) — End-of-year CUMULATIVE retention (the paper's headline): d = 0.04 · researcher-designed · 1-2yrThe Impact of Feedback on Student Attainment: A Systematic Review (EEF/EPPI-Centre, August 2021) — Overall (low/moderate risk-of-bias studies): d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Feedback on Student Attainment: A Systematic Review (EEF/EPPI-Centre, August 2021) — LOW risk-of-bias studies only (n=4): d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Feedback on Student Attainment: A Systematic Review (EEF/EPPI-Centre, August 2021) — MODERATE risk-of-bias studies (n=35): d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Feedback on Student Attainment: A Systematic Review (EEF/EPPI-Centre, August 2021) — SERIOUS risk-of-bias studies (n=7): d = 0.62 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Promise of Tutoring for PreK-12 Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental Evidence — Pooled tutoring effect: d = 0.37 · mixed · under-1yrThe Impact of Shared Book Reading on Children's Language Skills: A Meta-Analysis — Child language skills vs ACTIVE control: d = 0.028 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReport of the National Reading Panel, Ch. 3: Fluency (guided repeated oral reading; sustained silent reading) — Guided repeated oral reading, overall reading achievement (headline pooled estimate): d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReport of the National Reading Panel, Ch. 3: Fluency (guided repeated oral reading; sustained silent reading) — Word recognition / reading accuracy (guided repeated oral reading): d = 0.55 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReport of the National Reading Panel, Ch. 3: Fluency (guided repeated oral reading; sustained silent reading) — Reading rate/fluency: d = 0.44 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReport of the National Reading Panel, Ch. 3: Fluency (guided repeated oral reading; sustained silent reading) — Reading comprehension: d = 0.35 · mixed · end-of-treatmentReport of the National Reading Panel, Ch. 3: Fluency (guided repeated oral reading; sustained silent reading) — Aggregate/full-scale reading score: d = 0.5 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSchool meal quality and academic performance — Test scores, healthy-vendor contract (preferred estimate): d = 0.031 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of multiple micronutrient supplementation on cognitive function in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials — Memory (near transfer): d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of multiple micronutrient supplementation on cognitive function in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials — Language (domain skills): d = 0.09 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIodine and mental development of children 5 years old and under: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Mental development, RCTs of maternal iodine supplementation: d = 0.68 · standardized · unclearIodine and mental development of children 5 years old and under: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Mental development, cohorts stratified by iodine status: d = 0.52 · standardized · not-applicableEffect of Oral Iron Supplementation on Cognitive Function among Children and Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Intelligence test scores (near g): d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMultiple micronutrient supplementation for improving cognitive performance in children: systematic review of randomized controlled trials — Fluid intelligence, ages 5-16 (near g): d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMultiple micronutrient supplementation for improving cognitive performance in children: systematic review of randomized controlled trials — Crystallized intelligence, ages 5-16: d = -0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMultiple micronutrient supplementation for improving cognitive performance in children: systematic review of randomized controlled trials — Academic performance, ages 5-16 (domain skills): d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentPsychiatric and cognitive outcomes of iron supplementation in non-anemic children, adolescents, and menstruating adults: A meta-analysis and systematic review — Cognitive intelligence, non-anaemic (near g): d = 0.46 · standardized · end-of-treatmentPsychiatric and cognitive outcomes of iron supplementation in non-anemic children, adolescents, and menstruating adults: A meta-analysis and systematic review — Short-term memory, non-anaemic (near transfer): d = 0.53 · mixed · end-of-treatmentNutrition and cognitive achievement: An evaluation of the School Breakfast Program — Math achievement (grade 4, domain skills): d = 0.077 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNutrition and cognitive achievement: An evaluation of the School Breakfast Program — Reading achievement (grade 4, domain skills): d = 0.054 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNutrition and cognitive achievement: An evaluation of the School Breakfast Program — Math achievement (grade 5, ECLS-K): d = 0.096 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIodine supplementation improves cognition in mildly iodine-deficient children — Overall cognitive score, composite of 4 WISC-IV subtests (near g, NOT full-scale IQ): d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, all trials pooled (near g - IQ-style test scores, not demonstrated g): d = 0.46 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, restricted to LOW and MODERATE risk-of-bias trials - the bias-corrected estimate METHODOLOGY says to report (near g): d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, excluding trials that co-supplemented folic acid or vitamin C (near g): d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, supplementation lasting FOUR MONTHS OR MORE (near g): d = 0.21 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, ANAEMIC at baseline (near g): d = 0.79 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, NOT anaemic at baseline - the applicability-critical null (near g): d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Attention and concentration, all trials pooled (near transfer): d = 0.44 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Attention and concentration, excluding the single high risk-of-bias trial (near transfer): d = 0.33 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Memory, all trials pooled (near transfer): d = 0.44 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — School achievement - the outcome schools actually care about (domain skills): d = 0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of iron supplementation on cognitive development in school-age children: Systematic review and meta-analysis — Haemoglobin - the mechanism check confirming the supplement worked biologically (health): d = 1.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Providing Breakfast in Class on Student Performance — Math achievement (domain skills): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Providing Breakfast in Class on Student Performance — Reading achievement (domain skills): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentSchool feeding programs for improving the physical and psychological health of school children experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage (Cochrane Review) — Math achievement, LMIC (domain skills): d = 0.14 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSchool feeding programs for improving the physical and psychological health of school children experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage (Cochrane Review) — Reading achievement, LMIC (domain skills): d = 0.02 · mixed · end-of-treatmentBreakfast in the Classroom Initiative Does Not Improve Attendance or Standardized Test Scores among Urban Students: A Cluster Randomized Trial — Standardized reading exam (domain skills): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentBreakfast in the Classroom Initiative Does Not Improve Attendance or Standardized Test Scores among Urban Students: A Cluster Randomized Trial — Standardized math exam (domain skills): d = -0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUniversal Access to Free School Meals and Student Achievement — Math achievement, "exposed" districts (baseline eligibility below the 57.9% median): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentZinc intake, status and indices of cognitive function in adults and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Intelligence, children (near g): d = 0.001 · standardized · end-of-treatmentZinc intake, status and indices of cognitive function in adults and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Executive function, children (near transfer): d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentZinc intake, status and indices of cognitive function in adults and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Motor skills, children: d = 0.11 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of sugar on behavior or cognition in children: a meta-analysis — Direct behavioural observation: d = -0.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of sugar on behavior or cognition in children: a meta-analysis — Academic tests: d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentUnfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis — KV448 vs silence, independent-groups pre-post designs (independent MO-condition): d = 0.431 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUnfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis — KV448 vs silence, same analysis with the leverage point removed (leave-one-out): d = -0.171 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUnfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis — KV448 vs silence, one-group pre-post designs (dependent MO-condition): d = 0.158 · standardized · end-of-treatmentUnfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis — Any OTHER music vs no stimulus, one-group pre-post (OM-condition) - the Mozart-specificity test: d = 0.088 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading-Strategy Interventions in Whole Classrooms: A Meta-Analysis — Comprehension (standardized measures): d = 0.186 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading-Strategy Interventions in Whole Classrooms: A Meta-Analysis — Comprehension (researcher-developed measures): d = 0.431 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of Reading-Strategy Interventions in Whole Classrooms: A Meta-Analysis — Strategic-ability outcomes: d = 0.786 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentBlocking vs. Interleaving: Single-Session Effects Within Middle School Math Homework — Posttest accuracy, interleaved vs blocked (full sample): d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentBlocking vs. Interleaving: Single-Session Effects Within Middle School Math Homework — Hint usage, interleaved vs blocked (full sample): d = -0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentBlocking vs. Interleaving: Single-Session Effects Within Middle School Math Homework — Posttest accuracy, LOW-skill students: d = 0.6 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentPutting brain training to the test — The trained tasks themselves: d = 0.73 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Mathematics-related skills: d = 0.21 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Mathematics-related skills, EPHPP-weak studies REMOVED (the authors' own quality sensitivity analysis): d = 0.12 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Reading: d = 0.13 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Reading, EPHPP-weak studies REMOVED: d = 0.13 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Language-related skills: d = 0.16 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Composite academic score: d = 0.26 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Achievement and Physical Activity: A Meta-analysis — Time on task (classroom behaviour): d = 0.77 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffect of Exercise on Cognition, Memory, and Executive Function: A Study-Level Meta-Meta-Analysis Across Populations and Exercise Categories — Executive function, all populations, publication-bias adjusted: d = 0.012 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of Exercise on Cognition, Memory, and Executive Function: A Study-Level Meta-Meta-Analysis Across Populations and Exercise Categories — Memory, all populations, publication-bias adjusted: d = 0.027 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of Exercise on Cognition, Memory, and Executive Function: A Study-Level Meta-Meta-Analysis Across Populations and Exercise Categories — General cognition, all populations, publication-bias adjusted: d = 0.227 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: a meta-analysis — Cognitive performance, overall: d = 0.097 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: a meta-analysis — Cognitive performance DURING exercise: d = 0.101 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: a meta-analysis — Cognitive performance IMMEDIATELY after exercise: d = 0.108 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of acute exercise on cognitive performance: a meta-analysis — Cognitive performance after a DELAY: d = 0.103 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of an Acute Bout of Physical Activity on Executive Function and Academic Achievement in Preadolescent Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Executive function, accuracy: d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of an Acute Bout of Physical Activity on Executive Function and Academic Achievement in Preadolescent Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis — Executive function, response time: d = -0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of school-based physical activity on academic achievement in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Mathematics achievement: d = 0.11 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of school-based physical activity on academic achievement in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Overall academic achievement: d = 0.22 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of school-based physical activity on academic achievement in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Reading comprehension achievement: d = 0.07 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of school-based physical activity on academic achievement in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Language expression achievement: d = -0.06 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of physical activity on executive function in children and adolescents: A Bayesian dose-response network meta-analysis — Executive function, overall: d = 0.14 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of physical activity on executive function in children and adolescents: A Bayesian dose-response network meta-analysis — Executive function, aerobic exercise: d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of physical activity on executive function in children and adolescents: A Bayesian dose-response network meta-analysis — Executive function, skill/coordination activity: d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMeta-analysis of a moderate-to-vigorous physical activity intervention for academic achievement in children and adolescents — Academic performance, pooled: d = 0.24 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMeta-analysis of a moderate-to-vigorous physical activity intervention for academic achievement in children and adolescents — Composite achievement: d = 0.33 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of physical activity on schoolchildren's academic performance: The Active Smarter Kids (ASK) cluster-randomized controlled trial — Numeracy in the lowest baseline-numeracy tertile (pre-specified subgroup), as headlined: d = 0.62 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of physical activity on schoolchildren's academic performance: The Active Smarter Kids (ASK) cluster-randomized controlled trial — The SAME lowest-tertile numeracy effect, standardized against the whole-sample SD: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of exercise for improving cognition, memory and executive function: a systematic umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis — General cognition (pooled at review level, uncorrected): d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of exercise for improving cognition, memory and executive function: a systematic umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis — Memory (pooled, uncorrected): d = 0.26 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of exercise for improving cognition, memory and executive function: a systematic umbrella review and meta-meta-analysis — Executive function (pooled, uncorrected): d = 0.24 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAre changes in cardiorespiratory fitness resulting from physical activity interventions related to changes in executive function and academic performance in children and adolescents? A systematic review and meta-regression — Cardiorespiratory fitness (intervention main effect): d = 0.24 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAre changes in cardiorespiratory fitness resulting from physical activity interventions related to changes in executive function and academic performance in children and adolescents? A systematic review and meta-regression — Academic performance (intervention main effect): d = 0.11 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAre changes in cardiorespiratory fitness resulting from physical activity interventions related to changes in executive function and academic performance in children and adolescents? A systematic review and meta-regression — Executive function (intervention main effect): d = 0.15 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Academic achievement (overall): d = 0.14 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Mathematics achievement: d = 0.15 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Language achievement: d = 0.08 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — On-task behaviour: d = 1.04 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Creativity: d = 0.7 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Fluid intelligence: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Working memory: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMulti-Level Meta-Analysis of Physical Activity Interventions During Childhood: Effects of Physical Activity on Cognition and Academic Achievement — Executive function (combined): d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Adulthood summary index, Deming's own cohorts, Deming's own measurement window (successful direct replication): d = 0.228 · mixed · adulthoodElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Adulthood summary index, Deming's own cohorts (extended follow-up to 2014): d = 0.166 · mixed · adulthoodElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Adulthood summary index, complement (later) cohorts: d = -0.15 · mixed · adulthoodElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Adulthood summary index, all cohorts combined: d = -0.01 · mixed · adulthoodElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Adulthood summary index, children of low-AFQT mothers (maternal AFQT <= -1 SD), Deming's cohorts: d = 0.384 · mixed · adulthoodElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Cognitive test index (ages 5-14), Deming's cohorts vs complement cohorts: d = 0.11 · standardized · over-2yrElusive Longer-Run Impacts of Head Start: Replications Within and Across Cohorts — Non-test (behavioural) index, complement cohorts: d = -0.15 · mixed · over-2yrTransfer of Test-Enhanced Learning: Meta-Analytic Review and Synthesis — Overall transfer of test-enhanced learning: d = 0.4 · researcher-designed · unclearTransfer of Test-Enhanced Learning: Meta-Analytic Review and Synthesis — Response-congruent format transfer: d = 0.58 · researcher-designed · unclearEffects of Fact Retrieval Tutoring for Third-Grade Students with Math Difficulties With and Without Reading Difficulties — Fact retrieval, MD-only students, vs NO-TREATMENT control: d = 1.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Fact Retrieval Tutoring for Third-Grade Students with Math Difficulties With and Without Reading Difficulties — Fact retrieval, MD-only students, vs the TIME-CONTROLLED alternative (PROC/E): d = 1.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Fact Retrieval Tutoring for Third-Grade Students with Math Difficulties With and Without Reading Difficulties — Fact retrieval, BOTH subtypes pooled: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Career and Technical Education: Evidence from the Connecticut Technical High School System — Tenth-grade standardized test scores, males: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial behaviour, all ages, financial education vs control: d = 0.1003 · mixed · under-1yrFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial knowledge, all ages: d = 0.204 · mixed · under-1yrFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial behaviour, CHILDREN under 14 — the school-age cell: d = 0.064 · mixed · unclearFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial behaviour, youth aged 14-25: d = 0.1203 · mixed · unclearFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial knowledge, children under 14 (15 observations in seven studies): d = 0.2763 · mixed · unclearFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Financial behaviour measured two or more years after treatment (seven RCTs): d = 0.0574 · mixed · over-2yrFinancial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors — Re-estimation of Fernandes et al. (2014) under their own common-true-effect assumption: d = 0.065 · mixed · unclearFinancial education in schools: A meta-analysis of experimental studies — Financial knowledge, school-based financial education vs control: d = 0.25 · mixed · end-of-treatmentFinancial education in schools: A meta-analysis of experimental studies — Financial behaviour, school-based financial education vs control: d = 0.05 · mixed · unclearLabor market outcomes of formal vocational education and training: a meta-analysis — All labour-market outcomes, VET versus general education: d = 0.021 · standardized · unclearLabor market outcomes of formal vocational education and training: a meta-analysis — All labour-market outcomes, VET versus an unrestricted control: d = 0.071 · standardized · unclearWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — All student outcomes pooled: d = 0.132 · mixed · unclearWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — High-school completion: d = 0.137 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — Academic achievement in high school (grades, tests, credits): d = 0.093 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — Enrolment in a two-year college: d = 0.142 · standardized · under-1yrWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — Enrolment in a four-year college: d = -0.037 · standardized · under-1yrWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — College degree attainment: d = 0.02 · standardized · over-2yrWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — Employment: d = 0.182 · standardized · over-2yrWhat We Know About the Impact of Career and Technical Education: A Systematic Review of the Research — Earnings: d = 0.164 · standardized · over-2yrThe Environment in Raising Early Intelligence: A Meta-Analysis of the Fadeout Effect — IQ gain at the END of the intervention (full-data model): d = 0.368 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Environment in Raising Early Intelligence: A Meta-Analysis of the Fadeout Effect — LCPUFA prenatal supplementation (the mechanism-isolating case): d = 0.44 · standardized · over-2yrHead Start Impact Study: Final Report — Received dental care (parent-reported): d = 4 (pinned to edge) · self-report · end-of-treatmentHead Start Impact Study: Final Report — Health insurance coverage and general health status (parent-reported): d = 4 (pinned to edge) · self-report · over-2yrHead Start Impact Study: Final Report — Parenting practices: d = 4 (pinned to edge) · self-report · over-2yrThird Grade Follow-up to the Head Start Impact Study: Final Report (OPRE 2012-45) — Social-emotional, grade 3 — FAVOURABLE, parent-reported only: d = 4 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · over-2yrClassroom Assessment for Student Learning: Impact on Elementary School Mathematics in the Central Region — State mathematics achievement (CSAP scale score): d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentClassroom Assessment for Student Learning: Impact on Elementary School Mathematics in the Central Region — Teacher knowledge of classroom assessment (60-item test): d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentClassroom Assessment for Student Learning: Impact on Elementary School Mathematics in the Central Region — Quality of teachers' classroom assessment practice (blind-scored work samples): d = 0.03 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentClassroom Assessment for Student Learning: Impact on Elementary School Mathematics in the Central Region — Teacher-reported frequency of involving students in assessment: d = 0.26 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading outcomes overall, ALL 25 reading studies (fixed effects, no exclusions): d = 0.23 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading outcomes overall, 24 studies AFTER excluding the lead author's own outlier study (Ritter-00) - this is the headline number the literature quotes: d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading - Letters and Words: d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Writing: d = 0.45 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading - Oral Fluency: d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading - Global (overall reading batteries): d = 0.26 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Reading - COMPREHENSION: d = 0.18 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Mathematics - Global: d = 0.27 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Volunteer Tutoring Programs: A Meta-Analysis (RCT-only) — Programme structure moderator (high vs low structure) on the global reading outcome - the ONLY significant moderator found: d = 0.59 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAcademic Outcomes 2 Years After Working Memory Training for Children With Low Working Memory: A Randomized Clinical Trial — Visuospatial short-term memory, AWMA Dot Matrix (the trained construct): d = 0.43 · standardized · 1-2yrThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — Early literacy (EOY DIBELS-8 composite), any tutoring, full randomized sample: d = 0.054 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — Early literacy (EOY DIBELS-8 composite), any tutoring, preferred sample excluding MLL and SWD: d = 0.077 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — 1:1 tutoring vs control (DIBELS): d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — 2:1 tutoring vs control (DIBELS): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — MAP Reading Fluency (second standardized measure, exploratory): d = 1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — Lowest baseline readers ("Well Below Benchmark" on BOY DIBELS): d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effects of Virtual Tutoring on Young Readers: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial — First graders, 1:1 tutoring: d = 0.208 · standardized · end-of-treatmentInterleaved Practice Improves Mathematics Learning — Interleaved vs blocked, 1-day test: d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentInterleaved Practice Improves Mathematics Learning — Interleaved vs blocked, 30-day test: d = 0.79 · researcher-designed · under-1yrInterleaved Practice Improves Mathematics Learning — Baseline group equivalence on standardized (NAEP) items: d = 0.12 · standardized · not-applicableA Randomized Controlled Trial of Interleaved Mathematics Practice — Interleaved vs blocked, unannounced test ~1 month later: d = 0.83 · researcher-designed · under-1yrReciprocal Teaching: A Review of the Research (with the 1996 question-generation review) — Reading comprehension (reciprocal teaching): d = 0.88 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Testing Versus Restudy on Retention: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Testing Effect — Retention: testing vs restudy: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · unclearDoes Far Transfer Exist? Negative Evidence From Chess, Music, and Working Memory Training — Chess instruction against an ACTIVE control: d = 0.1 · mixed · end-of-treatmentDoes Far Transfer Exist? Negative Evidence From Chess, Music, and Working Memory Training — The one thing that DOES survive: WM training transferring to other memory tasks: d = 0.44 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Memory tasks, near transfer, all controls pooled: d = 0.389 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Nearest transfer (same or near-identical task to the one trained): d = 0.468 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Less-near transfer (different memory task, same Gsm construct): d = 0.261 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Memory tasks (near transfer) at follow-up: d = 0.239 · standardized · unclearWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Cognitive ability and academic achievement (far transfer), all controls pooled: d = 0.092 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Far transfer against NONACTIVE (no-contact / business-as-usual) controls: d = 0.139 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Far transfer against ACTIVE controls (the load-bearing estimate): d = 0.032 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWorking memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis — Far transfer at follow-up: d = 0.006 · standardized · unclearThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science knowledge and understanding, all pupils: d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science, FSM pupils: d = 0.38 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Key Stage 2 reading, one year later (transfer test): d = -0.01 · standardized · 1-2yrThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Key Stage 2 mathematics, one year later (transfer test): d = -0.06 · standardized · 1-2yrThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science attainment, all pupils: d = 0.01 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science attainment, FSM pupils: d = 0.05 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Pupil interest in science index: d = 0.12 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Pupil self-efficacy for science index: d = 0.09 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science (second re-grant – a two-armed, cluster randomised trial): Evaluation report — Year 5 Science Assessment, all pupils (Cohort 1): d = 0.02 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThinking, Doing, Talking Science (second re-grant – a two-armed, cluster randomised trial): Evaluation report — Year 5 Science Assessment, FSM pupils: d = 0 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentActive learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics — Examination and concept-inventory performance, active learning vs lecture: d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentStandardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform — Michigan state standardized science test (MEAP), first cohort: d = 0.44 · standardized · 1-2yrStandardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform — Michigan state standardized science test (MEAP), second (scaled-up) cohort: d = 0.37 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Efficacy of Student-Centered Instruction in Supporting Science Learning — Space Science Content test (MOSART), immediately post-unit: d = 0.171 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Efficacy of Student-Centered Instruction in Supporting Science Learning — Space Science Content test (MOSART), five-month follow-up: d = 0.067 · standardized · under-1yrThe Efficacy of Student-Centered Instruction in Supporting Science Learning — Models and Evidence Questionnaire (research team's own instrument), five-month follow-up: d = 0.573 · researcher-designed · under-1yrImpact of project-based curriculum materials on student learning in science: Results of a randomized controlled trial — End-of-unit test, physical science (energy) unit: d = 0.21 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpact of project-based curriculum materials on student learning in science: Results of a randomized controlled trial — End-of-unit test, Earth science unit: d = 0.25 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpact of project-based curriculum materials on student learning in science: Results of a randomized controlled trial — Evaluators' own summary of the prior PBIS literature by measure type: d = 0.37 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAssessing the Effect of Project-Based Learning on Science Learning in Elementary Schools — Grade-3 summative science assessment: d = 0.277 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAssessing the Effect of Project-Based Learning on Science Learning in Elementary Schools — Self-reflection during science activities: d = 0.544 · self-report · end-of-treatmentAssessing the Effect of Project-Based Learning on Science Learning in Elementary Schools — Ownership during science activities: d = 0.434 · self-report · end-of-treatmentAssessing the Effect of Project-Based Learning on Science Learning in Elementary Schools — Collaboration during science activities: d = 0.416 · self-report · end-of-treatmentExamining the effects of a highly rated science curriculum unit on diverse students: Results from a planning grant — Conservation of Matter Assessment, Cohort 1: d = 0.32 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentExamining the effects of a highly rated science curriculum unit on diverse students: Results from a planning grant — Conservation of Matter Assessment, Cohort 2: d = 0.25 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentExamining the effects of a highly rated science curriculum unit on diverse students: Results from a planning grant — WWC domain average, general science achievement, after clustering correction: d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Project-Based Learning on AP Exam Performance — Earned a qualifying AP score (3+), full sample, Year One: d = 0.264 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Project-Based Learning on AP Exam Performance — Earned a qualifying AP score, AP ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE subgroup: d = 0.304 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Project-Based Learning on AP Exam Performance — Continuous AP total score, four districts: d = 0.192 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Project-Based Learning on AP Exam Performance — Qualifying score, full sample, UNADJUSTED model: d = -0.005 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States — Inquiry strategies vs traditional science instruction: d = 0.65 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States — Enhanced context strategies (relating content to student experience): d = 1.48 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States — Collaborative learning strategies: d = 0.95 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States — Questioning strategies: d = 0.74 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States — Enhanced materials (curriculum materials alone): d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — All outcomes combined, activity-based vs conventional elementary science: d = 0.35 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Outcome measures judged BIASED TOWARD the activity-based programme: d = 0.54 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Outcome measures judged UNBIASED (independent/standardized): d = 0.24 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Outcome measures judged biased toward the COMPARISON (conventional) programme: d = 0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Science process skills (28 studies): d = 0.52 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Science content knowledge: d = 0.16 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Affective outcomes (attitude to science): d = 0.23 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Mathematics achievement (claimed transfer): d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Creativity (claimed transfer): d = 0.42 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis — Disadvantaged students vs advantaged students (moderator): d = 0.65 · mixed · end-of-treatmentInteractive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses — Average normalized FCI/MD gain, traditional lecture courses: d = 0.23 · mixed · end-of-treatmentInteractive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses — Average normalized FCI/MD gain, interactive-engagement courses: d = 0.48 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — Conceptual-change strategies vs comparison instruction, unadjusted: d = 1.1 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — Same effect corrected for small-study/publication bias: d = 0.71 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — Restricted to TRUE experiments (randomised): d = 0.64 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — Restricted to quasi-experiments: d = 1.23 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — PAIRED MEASURE CONTRAST - researcher-developed instruments: d = 1.17 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffectiveness of conceptual change strategies in science education: A meta‐analysis — PAIRED MEASURE CONTRAST - pre-existing (already-published) instruments: d = 0.88 · standardized · end-of-treatmentRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Refutation text vs non-refutation text, overall: d = 0.41 · researcher-designed · unclearRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Overall effect after trim-and-fill correction for small-study bias: d = 0.28 · researcher-designed · unclearRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Effect at same-day post-test: d = 0.39 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Effect at 2 days to 1 week: d = 0.38 · researcher-designed · under-1yrRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Effect at 8 days to 1 month: d = 0.43 · researcher-designed · under-1yrRefutation Text Facilitates Learning: a Meta-Analysis of Between-Subjects Experiments — Effect at more than 1 month: d = 0.56 · researcher-designed · under-1yrTeaching and learning floating and sinking: A meta‐analysis — Teaching floating and sinking, all designs: d = 0.85 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching and learning floating and sinking: A meta‐analysis — Restricted to treatment-control-group designs: d = 0.72 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching and learning floating and sinking: A meta‐analysis — Restricted to uncontrolled pre-post designs: d = 0.89 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentStrategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically — Generic critical thinking, CT instruction vs control (341 effects, higher-quality subset): d = 0.3 · standardized · end-of-treatmentStrategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically — Content-specific critical thinking (97 effects): d = 0.57 · mixed · end-of-treatmentStrategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically — Critical thinking disposition (25 effects): d = 0.23 · standardized · end-of-treatmentStrategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically — Subject-content learning as a by-product of CT instruction (140 effects): d = 0.33 · mixed · end-of-treatmentStrategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically — Middle school (11-15) vs high school (16-18): d = 0.37 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAccelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students — Piagetian Reasoning Tasks, WHOLE main experiment (all ages, both sexes), CASE vs matched control classes: d = 0.21 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAccelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students — Piagetian Reasoning Tasks, boys starting aged 12+ only, CASE vs matched control classes: d = 0.89 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAn Exploration of Long-Term Far-Transfer Effects Following an Extended Intervention Program in the High School Science Curriculum — GCSE science, mathematics and English, CASE vs control (same data as JRST part IV): d = 0.67 · standardized · over-2yrEffects of Inquiry-Based Approaches on Students' Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Science: A Meta-Analysis — Higher-order thinking skills, inquiry-based vs conventional instruction: d = 0.893 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Inquiry-Based Approaches on Students' Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Science: A Meta-Analysis — Range of individual study effects (dispersion, not an estimate): d = -0.367 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentLet's Think Secondary Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science attainment (KS3 SATs-based test), LTSS vs business-as-usual science teaching: d = -0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLet's Think Secondary Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — English attainment (GL Progress Test in English 13) — the far-transfer test: d = -0.15 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLet's Think Secondary Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Mathematics attainment (GL Progress in Maths 13) — the far-transfer test: d = -0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLet's Think Secondary Science: Evaluation report and executive summary — Science attainment, girls only (one significant subgroup out of many tested): d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of philosophy for children: an effectiveness trial — KS2 reading, FSM-eligible Year 6 pupils (primary outcome): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of philosophy for children: an effectiveness trial — KS2 reading, whole Year 6 cohort: d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of philosophy for children: an effectiveness trial — KS2 mathematics, whole Year 6 cohort: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEvaluation of philosophy for children: an effectiveness trial — Social and communication skills (two single non-validated survey items): d = -0.06 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFostering scientific reasoning in education – meta-analytic evidence from intervention studies — Scientific reasoning, intervention vs control (pooled): d = 0.8 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Thinking-skills approaches, overall (cognitive, curricular and affective outcomes combined): d = 0.74 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Cognitive measures: d = 0.62 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Curricular (attainment) outcomes: d = 0.62 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Mathematics attainment: d = 0.89 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Science attainment: d = 0.78 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils — Reading attainment: d = 0.4 · mixed · end-of-treatmentCognitive acceleration through science education II: its effects and scope — Piagetian Reasoning Tasks, CASE schools vs CSMS national norm-predicted gain: d = 0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAccelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: Three years after a two-year intervention — GCSE science, CASE 11+ cohort vs control classes: d = 0.67 · standardized · over-2yrAccelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: Three years after a two-year intervention — GCSE mathematics — transfer to a different school subject: d = 0.72 · standardized · over-2yrAccelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: Three years after a two-year intervention — GCSE English — transfer to a distant school subject: d = 0.69 · standardized · over-2yrThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Science understanding (23-item externally vetted subset), integrated vs science-only unit: d = 0.65 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Science writing, 7-dimension rubric (multivariate): d = 0.4 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Science vocabulary (taught words, definition-matching plus cloze): d = 0.22 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Science-word count in student writing: d = 0.8 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Reading comprehension (expository passages) — the transfer test: d = 0.09 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms — Science instructional time (confound, not an outcome of interest): d = 0.53 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAcquiring science and social studies knowledge in kindergarten through fourth grade: Conceptualization, design, implementation, and efficacy testing of content-area literacy instruction (CALI). — Social studies content knowledge, CALI vs business-as-usual literacy block: d = 2.27 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAcquiring science and social studies knowledge in kindergarten through fourth grade: Conceptualization, design, implementation, and efficacy testing of content-area literacy instruction (CALI). — Science content knowledge, CALI vs business-as-usual literacy block: d = 2.1 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAcquiring science and social studies knowledge in kindergarten through fourth grade: Conceptualization, design, implementation, and efficacy testing of content-area literacy instruction (CALI). — Woodcock-Johnson-III Passage Comprehension (grade 4 only; null in K-3): d = 0.22 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAcquiring science and social studies knowledge in kindergarten through fourth grade: Conceptualization, design, implementation, and efficacy testing of content-area literacy instruction (CALI). — Woodcock-Johnson-III Oral Comprehension (grade 4 only; null in K-3): d = 0.47 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAcquiring science and social studies knowledge in kindergarten through fourth grade: Conceptualization, design, implementation, and efficacy testing of content-area literacy instruction (CALI). — Woodcock-Johnson-III Picture Vocabulary (grade 4 only, n~75; null in K-3): d = 1.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffects of Integrated Literacy and Content-area Instruction on Vocabulary and Comprehension in the Elementary Years: A Meta-analysis — Reading comprehension, integrated literacy + content-area instruction (all measures pooled): d = 0.4 · mixed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Integrated Literacy and Content-area Instruction on Vocabulary and Comprehension in the Elementary Years: A Meta-analysis — Reading comprehension — RESEARCHER-DEVELOPED measures: d = 0.54 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentEffects of Integrated Literacy and Content-area Instruction on Vocabulary and Comprehension in the Elementary Years: A Meta-analysis — Reading comprehension — STANDARDIZED measures (the headline number): d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNGSS-Designed Curriculum Materials for the Middle Grades: Results from a Study on Student Learning in Physical Science — Grade-7 NGSS physical science performance expectations (Matter and Its Interactions), Amplify Science + PD vs business-as-usual NGSS instruction: d = 0.4 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentNGSS-Designed Curriculum Materials for the Middle Grades: Results from a Study on Student Learning in Physical Science — Teacher-reported instructional opportunities: reading science texts / writing in notebooks / communicating scientific thinking (treatment higher): d = 1.38 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNGSS-Designed Curriculum Materials for the Middle Grades: Results from a Study on Student Learning in Physical Science — Teacher-reported coverage of mathematics/computational thinking, data analysis, hands-on experience (CONTROL higher): d = -1.28 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentSuccess in introductory college physics: The role of high school preparation — College physics grade, took high school physics vs not (raw): d = 0.24 · standardized · over-2yrDepth versus breadth: How content coverage in high school science courses relates to later success in college science coursework — Standardized magnitude of the depth advantage: d = 0.08 · standardized · over-2yrExperimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis — Inquiry-based science programmes using science KITS vs control: d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExperimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis — Inquiry-oriented programmes emphasising professional development, no kits: d = 0.36 · standardized · end-of-treatmentExperimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis — Technology programmes with cooperative learning (small matched studies): d = 0.42 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhen Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure — PS-I (explore first) vs instruction-first, conceptual knowledge and/or transfer (pooled): d = 0.36 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhen Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure — PS-I vs instruction-first, procedural knowledge: d = -0.03 · mixed · end-of-treatmentMastery Learning Reconsidered (best-evidence synthesis) — Standardized achievement tests, 7 equal-time studies (Table 1): d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentMastery Learning Reconsidered (best-evidence synthesis) — Experimenter-made tests, equal-time studies (Table 2): d = 0.24 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentMastery Learning Reconsidered (best-evidence synthesis) — Extra corrective time, experimenter-made tests (Table 3): d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · under-1yrMastery Learning Reconsidered (best-evidence synthesis) — Anderson/Scott/Hutlock 1976 within-study measure-type gap (grades 1-6 mathematics, one year, matched mastery and control schools in Lorain, Ohio): d = 0.64 · mixed · end-of-treatmentSchool start times and academic achievement - a systematic review on grades and test scores — Magnitude among the best-evidence studies: d = 0.03 · standardized · unclearEmbedding Formative Assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary — Attainment 8 (GCSE), all pupils: d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEmbedding Formative Assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary — GCSE ENGLISH, all pupils (secondary outcome): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEmbedding Formative Assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary — GCSE MATHS, all pupils (secondary outcome): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEmbedding Formative Assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary — Pupils eligible for free school meals: d = 0.07 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEmbedding Formative Assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary — Schools without prior TEEP exposure (exploratory subgroup): d = 0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs Phonological-Only Instruction Helpful for Reading? A Meta-Analysis — PA-only vs untreated comparison: d = 0.57 · mixed · end-of-treatmentIs Phonological-Only Instruction Helpful for Reading? A Meta-Analysis — PA-only vs PRINT-based instruction: d = -0.54 · mixed · end-of-treatmentProject STAR and Krueger's reanalysis (Experimental Estimates of Education Production Functions) — The same effects expressed in standard deviations (the archive's comparable unit): d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWhat One Hundred Years of Research Says About Ability Grouping and Acceleration (second-order meta-analysis) — Within-class ability grouping: d = 0.19 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat One Hundred Years of Research Says About Ability Grouping and Acceleration (second-order meta-analysis) — Cross-grade subject grouping (Joplin): d = 0.26 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat One Hundred Years of Research Says About Ability Grouping and Acceleration (second-order meta-analysis) — Between-class streaming/tracking: d = -0.04 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat One Hundred Years of Research Says About Ability Grouping and Acceleration (second-order meta-analysis) — Special grouped gifted classes: d = 0.37 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWhat One Hundred Years of Research Says About Ability Grouping and Acceleration (second-order meta-analysis) — Acceleration vs same-age peers / vs older classmates: d = 0.7 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Total academic achievement: d = 0.54 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Ability/IQ-type measures: d = 0.34 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Single-subject designs (design-inflated, analyzed separately): d = 0.83 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Affective outcomes (self-concept, attitude to school/subject): d = 0.33 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Other/multiple academic subjects: d = 0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research — Teacher and parent views of the programs: d = 0.4 · self-report · end-of-treatmentQuality of Research Design Moderates Effects of Grade Retention on Achievement: A Meta-Analytic, Multilevel Analysis — Achievement effect of retention in the lowest-design-quality studies: d = -0.3 · standardized · unclearQuality of Research Design Moderates Effects of Grade Retention on Achievement: A Meta-Analytic, Multilevel Analysis — Achievement effect of retention in medium- and high-design-quality studies: d = 0.04 · standardized · unclearIncreasing instruction time in school does increase learning — Reading achievement from three extra weekly hours, no teaching programme: d = 0.15 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIncreasing instruction time in school does increase learning — Reading achievement from three extra weekly hours WITH an expert teaching programme: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentLearning from Summer: Effects of Voluntary Summer Learning Programs on Low-Income Urban Youth — Mathematics achievement after one summer (intent to treat, randomised): d = 0.08 · standardized · end-of-treatmentHomework and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research — Overall effect of homework on achievement (random effects): d = 0.229 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentDoes lengthening the school day increase students’ academic achievement? Results from a natural experiment in Chile — Language achievement from moving to a full school day (about 27% more annual instructional time): d = 0.05 · standardized · 1-2yrDoes lengthening the school day increase students’ academic achievement? Results from a natural experiment in Chile — Mathematics achievement from the same reform: d = 0 · standardized · 1-2yrNew evidence on the importance of instruction time for student achievement on international assessments — Achievement per additional weekly hour of subject instruction, PISA 2006 (Lavy's wave): d = 0.058 · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew evidence on the importance of instruction time for student achievement on international assessments — The same estimate in every other PISA wave: d = 2000 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentNew evidence on the importance of instruction time for student achievement on international assessments — The same estimate across six TIMSS waves: d = 1995 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo students benefit from longer school days? Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida's additional hour of literacy instruction — Reading achievement in the first year of the extra literacy hour: d = 0.05 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo students benefit from longer school days? Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida's additional hour of literacy instruction — Decay of the school-level effect: d = 0.2 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of grade retention: A systematic review and meta-analysis — Overall effect of grade retention across design-gated studies: d = -0.04 · standardized · unclearEffectiveness of grade retention: A systematic review and meta-analysis — Achievement outcomes only: d = -0.07 · standardized · unclearEffectiveness of grade retention: A systematic review and meta-analysis — School-career outcomes (attainment and dropout): d = -0.1 · standardized · over-2yrEffectiveness of grade retention: A systematic review and meta-analysis — Psychosocial outcomes: d = 0.08 · standardized · unclearHelping or Hurting: The Effects of Retention in the Third Grade on Student Outcomes — ELA achievement, same-grade comparison: d = 0.528 · standardized · over-2yrHelping or Hurting: The Effects of Retention in the Third Grade on Student Outcomes — Mathematics achievement, same-grade comparison: d = 0.522 · standardized · over-2yrThe association between homework and primary school children's academic achievement. International evidence from PIRLS and TIMSS — Primary-school achievement per extra ten minutes of teacher-assigned homework: d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review — Summer school and literacy achievement: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review — Out-of-school-time programmes and literacy achievement: d = -0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review — Out-of-school-time programmes and mathematics achievement: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review — Academic motivation: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review — Social-emotional skills: d = 0.03 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo Differences in Schools' Instruction Time Explain International Achievement Gaps? Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries — Subject test score per additional weekly hour of instruction, OECD sample: d = 5.76 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentDo Differences in Schools' Instruction Time Explain International Achievement Gaps? Evidence from Developed and Developing Countries — Subject test score per additional weekly hour, developing-country sample: d = 2.99 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Impact of Summer Programs on Student Mathematics Achievement: A Meta-Analysis — Mathematics achievement from summer programmes: d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Retention Under Mississippi's Test-Based Promotion Policy — Grade-6 ELA achievement (same-grade), reduced form: d = 0.067 · standardized · over-2yrThe Effect of Retention Under Mississippi's Test-Based Promotion Policy — Grade-6 ELA achievement (same-grade), instrumented: d = 1.153 · standardized · over-2yrTime Spent on Homework and Academic Achievement: A Meta-analysis Study Related to Results of TIMSS — Association by TIMSS cycle: d = 1999 (pinned to edge) · standardized · not-applicableInstruction time, Classroom Quality, and Academic Achievement — Return to an extra weekly hour by classroom quality: d = 0.025 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWho benefits from homework assignments? — Achievement of pupils in homework classes, naive OLS: d = -0.1206 · standardized · not-applicableWho benefits from homework assignments? — Average achievement effect of homework, school-grade fixed effects: d = 0.052 · standardized · end-of-treatmentOnline Mathematics Homework Increases Student Achievement — End-of-year mathematics achievement from feedback-bearing online homework: d = 8.835 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effects of test-based retention on student outcomes over time: Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida — Reading achievement versus SAME-AGE peers, years 1 to 3: d = 0.58 · standardized · 1-2yrThe effects of test-based retention on student outcomes over time: Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida — Reading achievement versus SAME-AGE peers, years 4 to 7: d = 0.11 · standardized · over-2yrThe effects of test-based retention on student outcomes over time: Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida — Maths achievement versus SAME-AGE peers over time: d = 0.42 · standardized · over-2yrThe effects of test-based retention on student outcomes over time: Regression discontinuity evidence from Florida — Reading achievement versus SAME-GRADE peers: d = 0.73 · standardized · over-2yrIs four less than five? Effects of four-day school weeks on student achievement in Oregon — Maths achievement after switching to a four-day school week: d = -0.044 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs four less than five? Effects of four-day school weeks on student achievement in Oregon — Reading achievement after switching to a four-day school week: d = -0.033 · standardized · end-of-treatmentIs four less than five? Effects of four-day school weeks on student achievement in Oregon — Return to an additional hour of weekly time in school (IV, published version): d = 0.018 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Single word reading vs UNTREATED controls (primary reading outcome): d = 0.079 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Passage reading comprehension vs UNTREATED controls: d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Receptive language vs UNTREATED controls (primary language outcome): d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Expressive language vs UNTREATED controls: d = -0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Single word reading vs ACTIVE controls (alternative treatment): d = -0.026 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Passage reading comprehension vs ACTIVE controls: d = -0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Receptive language vs ACTIVE controls: d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program — Expressive language vs ACTIVE controls: d = -0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Response to Recent Reanalyses of the National Reading Panel Report: Effects of Systematic Phonics Instruction Are Practically Significant — Systematic phonics vs no-phonics control (a): d = 0.514 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Response to Recent Reanalyses of the National Reading Panel Report: Effects of Systematic Phonics Instruction Are Practically Significant — Some phonics vs no-phonics (b): d = 0.243 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Response to Recent Reanalyses of the National Reading Panel Report: Effects of Systematic Phonics Instruction Are Practically Significant — Systematic vs some phonics (c = a − b) — the live question: d = 0.27 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Differential (high-variability) vs traditional repetitive practice, acquisition: d = 0.26 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Differential vs traditional practice, retention: d = 0.61 · mixed · under-1yrAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Retention, sport technical skills subgroup: d = 0.63 · researcher-designed · under-1yrAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Retention, sport performance outcomes subgroup: d = 1 · researcher-designed · under-1yrAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Acquisition, fine motor skills subgroup (null/negative): d = -0.12 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAn exploratory meta-analytic review on the empirical evidence of differential learning as an enhanced motor learning method — Acquisition, tactical behaviour in sport subgroup (null): d = 0.2 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Effect of Evaluation on Teacher Performance — Student mathematics achievement in years AFTER the evaluation year: d = 0.111 · standardized · 1-2yrFluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading: A Meta-Analysis — Fluency on PRACTICED passages: d = 0.83 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading: A Meta-Analysis — Comprehension on PRACTICED passages: d = 0.67 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentFluency and Comprehension Gains as a Result of Repeated Reading: A Meta-Analysis — Combined transfer + non-transfer (fluency / comprehension): d = 0.64 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling (DfES RR711) — Word reading accuracy: d = 0.27 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling (DfES RR711) — Reading comprehension: d = 0.24 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Systematic Review of the Research Literature on the Use of Phonics in the Teaching of Reading and Spelling (DfES RR711) — Spelling: d = 0.09 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems — Human tutoring vs no tutoring: d = 0.79 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems — Step-based intelligent tutoring systems: d = 0.76 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems — Substep-based tutoring (the finest granularity, the newest technology): d = 0.4 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems — Answer-based CAI: d = 0.31 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWord-Problem Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of 65 Years of Research — Word-problem interventions, overall: d = 0.95 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWord-Problem Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of 65 Years of Research — Word-problem interventions measured on STANDARDIZED tests: d = 0.3 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of providing free glasses on children's educational outcomes in China - cluster randomized controlled trial — The effect is smaller than the trial was powered to find, and smaller than a baseline imbalance: d = 0.11 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of a Randomized Interventional School-Based Vision Program on Academic Performance of Students in Grades 3 to 7 - A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial (Vision for Baltimore) — i-Ready reading, all students, SY 2016-17: d = 0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of a Randomized Interventional School-Based Vision Program on Academic Performance of Students in Grades 3 to 7 - A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial (Vision for Baltimore) — i-Ready reading, all students, SY 2017-18 (the second 1-year replication within the trial): d = 0.12 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of a Randomized Interventional School-Based Vision Program on Academic Performance of Students in Grades 3 to 7 - A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial (Vision for Baltimore) — i-Ready reading, lowest baseline quartile: d = 0.28 · standardized · end-of-treatmentEffect of a Randomized Interventional School-Based Vision Program on Academic Performance of Students in Grades 3 to 7 - A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial (Vision for Baltimore) — i-Ready reading, students in special education: d = 0.25 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Problem-Based Learning Meta-Analysis: Differences Across Problem/Implementation Types, Disciplines, and Assessment Levels — Overall PBL vs traditional (all outcomes): d = 0.13 · mixed · unclearThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Executive function (latent variable): d = 0.017 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Cardiorespiratory fitness (20-m shuttle run): d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Relational memory: d = -0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Processing speed: d = 0.04 · standardized · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Internalising symptoms (SDQ peer + emotional): d = 0.05 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Externalising symptoms (SDQ conduct + hyperactivity): d = 0.06 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Global self-esteem (PSDQ-S): d = -0.05 · self-report · end-of-treatmentThe effect of a one-year vigorous physical activity intervention on fitness, cognitive performance and mental health in young adolescents: the Fit to Study cluster randomised controlled trial — Physical self-esteem (PSDQ-S): d = -0.01 · self-report · end-of-treatmentDo Statewide Pre-K Programs Have Persistent Effects? Evidence from North Carolina (with Dodge et al. 2017 and Bai et al. 2020) — Grade-5 achievement: d = 0.2 · standardized · over-2yrTeaching Elementary Students Who Speak Black English Vernacular to Write in Standard English: Effects of Dialect Transformation Practice — Writing output (the only outcome the What Works Clearinghouse judged eligible): d = 0.27 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Efficacy of Written Corrective Feedback in Improving L2 Written Accuracy: A Meta‐Analysis — L2 written accuracy after written corrective feedback: d = 0.54 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Challenge of Improving Children's Writing Ability: A Randomized Evaluation of "Writing Wings" — Conventions dimension of children's own writing ("proper use of grammar, paragraphing, punctuation, and spelling"): d = 0.021 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe Challenge of Improving Children's Writing Ability: A Randomized Evaluation of "Writing Wings" — Total writing score: d = 0.021 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentHow effective is feedback for L1, L2, and FL learners’ writing? A meta-analysis — Surface-level writing outcomes (mechanics, grammar, accuracy) after surface-level feedback: d = 0.58 · unknown · end-of-treatmentHow effective is feedback for L1, L2, and FL learners’ writing? A meta-analysis — Deep-level writing outcomes (content, organisation, quality) after SURFACE-level feedback, FL learners: d = -0.23 · unknown · end-of-treatmentHow effective is feedback for L1, L2, and FL learners’ writing? A meta-analysis — Deep-level writing outcomes after deep-level feedback: d = 0.8 · unknown · end-of-treatmentCan algorithm-based feedback help students to write better? A meta-analysis exploring surface- and deep-level outcomes — Surface-level writing outcomes (grammar, spelling, mechanics) after algorithm-based feedback: d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · under-1yrCan algorithm-based feedback help students to write better? A meta-analysis exploring surface- and deep-level outcomes — Deep-level writing outcomes after algorithm-based feedback: d = 0.31 · researcher-designed · under-1yrCan algorithm-based feedback help students to write better? A meta-analysis exploring surface- and deep-level outcomes — Overall effect of algorithm-based feedback on writing: d = 0.36 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately — Ability to write accurately in NEW text, corrected group vs uncorrected control: d = -0.1555 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentThe effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately — Absolute accuracy gain within corrected groups (no control arm): d = 0.1486 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentImpacts of a Prekindergarten Program on Children's Mathematics, Language, Literacy, Executive Function, and Emotional Skills — Early literacy (WJ Letter-Word ID): d = 0.62 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImpacts of a Prekindergarten Program on Children's Mathematics, Language, Literacy, Executive Function, and Emotional Skills — Mathematics: d = 0.59 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImpacts of a Prekindergarten Program on Children's Mathematics, Language, Literacy, Executive Function, and Emotional Skills — Receptive language (PPVT): d = 0.44 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImpacts of a Prekindergarten Program on Children's Mathematics, Language, Literacy, Executive Function, and Emotional Skills — Executive function: d = 0.2 · standardized · end-of-treatmentAsk the Cognitive Scientist: The Usefulness of Brief Instruction in Reading Comprehension Strategies — Average effect of teaching a comprehension strategy: d = 0.33 · mixed · end-of-treatmentAsk the Cognitive Scientist: The Usefulness of Brief Instruction in Reading Comprehension Strategies — Dose-response (~6 vs ~50 sessions): d = 0 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Overall achievement/learning, all feedback types pooled: d = 0.48 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Controlled (experimental) studies only: d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Published journal articles vs dissertations: d = 0.49 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — High-information feedback (task + process + sometimes self-regulation level): d = 0.99 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Corrective feedback: d = 0.46 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Reinforcement or punishment (uninformative feedback — praise, rewards, sanctions): d = 0.24 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Cognitive outcomes (achievement, retention, test performance): d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Motivational outcomes (intrinsic motivation, locus of control, self-efficacy, persistence): d = 0.33 · mixed · end-of-treatmentThe Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research — Behavioural outcomes (classroom behaviour, discipline): d = 0.48 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, GRAMMAR instruction, elementary grades: d = -0.41 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, strategy instruction, elementary grades: d = 1.02 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, adding self-regulation to strategy instruction: d = 0.5 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, text structure instruction: d = 0.59 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, creativity/imagery instruction: d = 0.7 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, transcription skills instruction (handwriting/spelling/typing): d = 0.55 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, prewriting activities: d = 0.54 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, peer assistance when writing: d = 0.89 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, setting product goals: d = 0.76 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, assessing writing (feedback): d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, word processing: d = 0.47 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, extra writing time: d = 0.3 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA Meta-Analysis of Writing Instruction for Students in the Elementary Grades. — Writing quality, comprehensive writing programmes: d = 0.42 · mixed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, grammar instruction vs alternative writing instruction: d = -0.32 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, grammar instruction - two outliers removed: d = -0.34 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, sentence-combining instruction: d = 0.5 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, strategy instruction (all): d = 0.82 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, SRSD specifically: d = 1.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, strategy instruction - struggling writers vs the full classroom range: d = 1.02 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, process writing approach without professional development: d = 0.03 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Writing quality, process writing approach WITH professional development: d = 0.46 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. — Hillocks (1986) focus-of-instruction averages as reported by Graham & Perin - grammar: d = -0.29 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentDoes spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review — Spelling, formal instruction vs none/unrelated instruction: d = 0.54 · standardized · end-of-treatmentDoes spelling instruction make students better spellers, readers, and writers? A meta-analytic review — Spelling, more formal vs less formal instruction: d = 0.7 · standardized · end-of-treatmentWriting instruction improves students’ writing skills differentially depending on focal instruction and children: A meta-analysis for primary grade students — Written composition overall, K-3: d = 0.31 · mixed · end-of-treatmentWriting instruction improves students’ writing skills differentially depending on focal instruction and children: A meta-analysis for primary grade students — Written composition, SRSD/self-regulation strategy instruction: d = 0.59 · mixed · end-of-treatmentTeaching children to write: A meta-analysis of writing intervention research — Writing performance, goal setting: d = 2.03 (pinned to edge) · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching children to write: A meta-analysis of writing intervention research — Writing performance, strategy instruction: d = 0.96 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching children to write: A meta-analysis of writing intervention research — Writing performance, feedback: d = 0.88 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching children to write: A meta-analysis of writing intervention research — Writing performance, text structure instruction: d = 0.76 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Handwriting legibility: d = 0.59 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Handwriting fluency: d = 0.63 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Writing quality: d = 0.84 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Writing length: d = 1.33 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Handwriting legibility and fluency, MOTOR instruction specifically: d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Handwriting Instruction — Handwriting legibility, individualised instruction: d = 0.69 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Writing Approaches in Grades 2 to 12. Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) — Writing achievement, all writing programmes: d = 0.18 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Writing Approaches in Grades 2 to 12. Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) — Writing achievement, writing-process programmes: d = 0.17 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Writing Approaches in Grades 2 to 12. Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) — Writing achievement, cooperative-learning programmes: d = 0.16 · standardized · end-of-treatmentA Quantitative Synthesis of Research on Writing Approaches in Grades 2 to 12. Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) — Writing achievement, reading-writing integration programmes: d = 0.19 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — English attainment (GL Progress in English), whole-class Grammar for Writing: d = 0.1 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — English attainment, whole-class PLUS small-group Grammar for Writing: d = 0.24 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImproving Writing Quality: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Extended writing score (GL Assessment PiE 11, blind-marked), low attainers, full Year 6 + Year 7 dose: d = 0.74 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImproving Writing Quality: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Reading score (secondary outcome, same test): d = -0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImproving Writing Quality: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Spelling and grammar score (secondary outcome, same test): d = -0.13 · standardized · end-of-treatmentImproving Writing Quality: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary — Extended writing, FSM-eligible subgroup: d = 1.6 (pinned to edge) · standardized · end-of-treatmentCalderdale Excellence Partnership: IPEELL. Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing, two years of IPEELL: d = 0.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentCalderdale Excellence Partnership: IPEELL. Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing, one year of IPEELL: d = -0.09 · standardized · end-of-treatmentCalderdale Excellence Partnership: IPEELL. Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing, FSM pupils (two-year / one-year): d = 0.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing skill (bespoke KS2-based test), all pupils - PRIMARY OUTCOME: d = -0.02 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing skill, EverFSM pupils: d = 0.05 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — KS2 GPS (grammar, punctuation and spelling) national test - the ONLY outcome whose CI excluded zero, and it is negative: d = -0.06 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — KS2 writing attainment (teacher assessment) national outcome: d = 0.02 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — KS2 reading national test: d = 0.01 · standardized · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing skill, LOWER prior-attaining pupils (below KS1 writing median): d = -0.11 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — Writing skill, HIGHER prior-attaining pupils (at or above KS1 writing median): d = 0.01 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentGrammar for Writing: Evaluation report and executive summary — Association between observed implementation FIDELITY and pupil writing outcomes (exploratory, non-randomised, within 18 observed schools): d = -0.17 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching grammar and writing: A randomised controlled trial and implementation process evaluation of Englicious — Narrative writing (primary outcome), ages 6-7: d = 0.03 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentTeaching grammar and writing: A randomised controlled trial and implementation process evaluation of Englicious — Sentence generation (secondary, grammar-proximal outcome), ages 6-7: d = 0.14 · researcher-designed · end-of-treatmentAssisting Students Struggling with Mathematics: Intervention in the Elementary Grades (WWC Practice Guide 2021006) — Systematic (explicit) instruction (Rec 1) — general mathematics achievement: d = 0.31 · mixed · end-of-treatmentTesting (Quizzing) Boosts Classroom Learning: A Systematic and Meta-Analytic Review — Overall achievement gain from quizzing: d = 0.499 · researcher-designed · under-1yrTesting (Quizzing) Boosts Classroom Learning: A Systematic and Meta-Analytic Review — Transfer to related but UNTESTED material: d = 0.321 · researcher-designed · under-1yrReviewing the Evidence on How Teacher Professional Development Affects Student Achievement — Student achievement, restricted to the five clean randomised controlled trials: d = 0.51 · mixed · end-of-treatment

1306 of 1306 standardized effects survive your bars · only effects reported as standardized mean differences (d) appear — mixed metrics never share an axis · |d| beyond [−1, +1.5] is pinned to the edge (true value in the tooltip) · every dot links to its source. The shaded corner is the archive’s thesis: the biggest numbers come from the weakest designs.

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