THE LEARNING AGENCY LAB
At the Learning Agency Lab, we use the science of learning to improve outcomes for historically underserved students. We work with researchers, data scientists, and learning science experts to develop tools and programs for the social good.
We offer several learning science resource guides covering different learning and education approaches. Whether you are an ed tech organization or an educator, we can help you better understand and advance the science of learning to improve student learning.
THE LATEST FROM THE CURVE
We surveyed 200 teachers and found widespread support for this sector of ed tech. In December 2020, the Learning Agency Lab (the Lab) and Georgia
The term “acceleration” has been popping up a lot of late in the education press. “High dosage tutoring” is cited as a possible key to
THE FEEDBACK PRIZE
Georgia State University and The Learning Agency Lab just launched a new Kaggle competition to develop algorithms that help struggling students dramatically improve their writing. In this competition, participants are tasked with identifying argumentative elements in essays written by students in grades 6-12. The algorithms developed will help students receive more individualized feedback on their writing!
THE SCIENCE OF LEARNING SERIES
The Learning Agency Lab recently released six powerful videos from our “Science of Learning: Research Meets Practice” project. With the support of many partners, the project aimed to get the science of learning into the hands of teaching professionals as well as to parents, school leaders, and students.
We have developed one of the first study “hacks” courses based on the science of learning.
DOES PROOFREADING BOOST LEARNING?
Does proofreading encourage deep learning? The Learning Agency team admits some mistakes and shares some ideas about how teachers can promote deep reading.
DO GIFTED AND TALENTED PROGRAMS WORK?
The basic logic of gifted programs is at odds with many research findings. Gifted programs and other forms of “tracking”— where students are grouped by their achievement level or perceived ability — are supposed to improve academic outcomes. But there’s little evidence that they do.