Randomized controlled trials are the wiki's gold-standard causal evidence: genai-can-harm-teaching-rct-2026, access-not-enough-ai-tutoring-2026, lets-chat-chatbot-outreach-2026, and genai-policy-prompting-rct are pre-registered field experiments showing AI's educational effects are real, heterogeneous, and sometimes negative — causal designs separate hype from effect (efficacy-study, learning-gains, randomized-controlled-trials-education).
Related Pages
📎 12 other pages tagged rct
- A meta-analysis of the effect of generative AI on productivity and learning in programming
- Access is Not Enough: Human Support Improves Engagement with AI Tutoring
- AI Assistance for Discretionary Work: Increasing Feedback Provision in Higher Education
- AI Assistance Reduces Persistence and Hurts Independent Performance
- AI in K-12 Evidence Base
- Analysis and Prediction of At-Risk Students Using Machine Learning Algorithms
- Do Gains from Generative AI-Enabled Adaptive Pretesting Persist? Evidence from a Retention Study
- Generative AI Can Harm Teaching
- Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics
- How AI Is Changing Teaching Workflows
- Let's Chat: Leveraging Chatbot Outreach for Improved Course Performance
- Transforming GenAI Policy to Prompting Instruction (RCT)