Average effect
d = 0.42
Cross-intervention effect size across all approaches.
Meta-analysis on learning impact
Aggregated insights from 146 international studies on teaching quality and learning environments. Inspired by Hattie’s Visible Learning model with enhanced evidence filters.
Study volume
146
Peer-reviewed meta studies published between 2012 and 2024.
Learner cohorts
K1–K13
Coverage from early childhood settings to upper secondary.
Comparative overview
Tabs segment effect sizes by learning phase, competency dimension, and methodological rigor.
| Learning phase | Studies n | Effect size d | Confidence 95% |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary education | 52 | 0.38 | 0.31–0.44 |
| Lower secondary | 47 | 0.45 | 0.37–0.50 |
| Upper secondary | 31 | 0.51 | 0.43–0.60 |
| Transition to HE | 16 | 0.33 | 0.21–0.46 |
| Competency | Approaches n | Effect size d | Best practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reading literacy | 34 | 0.48 | Structured reading strategies |
| Mathematics | 41 | 0.44 | Explicit modelling |
| Digital literacy | 22 | 0.36 | Adaptive learning paths |
| Metacognition | 19 | 0.57 | Reflection journals |
| Study type | Publications | Peer review | Bias risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Randomized control | 58 | Yes (96%) | Very low |
| Quasi-experimental | 42 | Yes (81%) | Low |
| Mixed methods | 29 | Yes (74%) | Moderate |
| Longitudinal | 17 | Yes (63%) | Moderate |