
The cohort, at the overlook
This is the technical companion to the plain-language summary. It states each study’s method, what its comparison group actually received, and how much weight the finding can carry.
Every study below names its method, so the list runs strongest first. None of these words is doing anything clever — each one describes how the researchers found something to compare against.
MDRC’s lottery-based evaluation reported no significant effect on graduation, college readiness or enrolment. These are its seven estimates.
Every band crosses zero, so nothing is statistically significant. Every band also reaches past +10 points, an effect that would be educationally large. The study cannot distinguish those two cases. With 241 students in the comparison group, that is a question of power, not of evidence for absence.
The studies estimate different quantities against different comparison groups, so an average across them would not describe anything. Direction is carried by shape and words, not colour alone.
One note per study, stated once rather than repeated under every outcome it touches.
{{ n.body }}
Low certainty does not mean a finding is wrong. It means the evidence cannot yet carry the weight placed on it.
{{ p }}
Named so the gaps are visible rather than silent.
Not yet read at source. Reported to raise on-time graduation at Massachusetts regional vocational technical high schools by roughly 7 to 10 percentage points, with larger effects for low-income students. A second separate-institution counterfactual alongside Connecticut.
No pre-registered protocol and no exhaustive search. The initial searches were seeded with studies expected to support our case, which biases what was found, and we state it rather than let the format imply otherwise.
Compiled by BusinessTech Academy, Santa Fe High School. Corrections are welcome and will be made in public.