Research findings regarding the effects of educational interventions—typically reported in units of standard deviations (e.g., Cohen’s d)—are often translated into more intuitive metrics before being communicated to teachers. However, there is no consensus about the most suitable metric, and no study has systematically examined how teachers respond to the different options. We conducted two preregistered studies addressing this issue. We found that teachers have strong preferences concerning effect size metrics in terms of informativeness, understandability, and helpfulness. These preferences challenge current research reporting recommendations. Most importantly, we found that different metrics induce different perceptions of an intervention’s effectiveness—a situation that could cause teachers to have unrealistic expectations about what a given intervention may achieve. Implications for how educational effects should be communicated are discussed.

有关教育干预效果的研究结果-通常以标准差为单位进行报告（例如，Cohen's d）—在传达给老师之前，通常会转换成更直观的指标。但是，对于最合适的指标并没有达成共识，也没有研究系统地检查过教师对不同选择的反应。我们针对此问题进行了两项预先注册的研究。我们发现，在信息量，可理解性和帮助性方面，教师对效果大小量度有强烈的偏好。这些偏好挑战了当前的研究报告建议。最重要的是，我们发现不同的度量标准会导致对干预效果的不同理解，这种情况可能导致教师对特定干预可能实现的目标抱有不切实际的期望。讨论了如何传播教育效果的含义。