News · Programs
Four years of Nothing: what the data says, and does not
Four years of survey data from the Nothing program, including the parts that are not conclusive.
The Nothing program has now run for four years with a consistent survey instrument. We have 412 responses from kids who attend regularly and 388 from kids who do not. This is not a randomized controlled trial, and we are not going to pretend it is. But it is four years of data and it is worth writing down.
What we see
| Statement | Nothing kids | Comparison group |
|---|---|---|
| I can keep going when something is hard. | 3.4 | 3.1 |
| I can sit with a problem before solving it. | 3.3 | 2.8 |
| I feel like an adult here listens to me. | 3.5 | 3.3 |
| I can explain what I made to someone else. | 3.2 | 3.3 |
The two differences that survive a second look are persistence and sitting with a problem. The listening difference is probably selection: kids who choose Nothing are already kids who like quiet adults. The explanation score is flat or slightly lower, which we do not have a good story for.
What we cannot say
- We cannot say Nothing causes persistence. Kids self-select into it.
- We cannot say it works for every kid. About 15% of kids try it and do not come back, and they are not wrong.
- We cannot say it is better than a second program. It might just be different.
- We cannot say it works because it is quiet. It might work because it is voluntary.
What we are doing next
A kid-led interview project in 2026: twenty kids, twenty minutes each, asking them what they think about when they are in the Void. The interviews will be run by teen leaders, not staff, because kids tell other kids things they do not tell us. We will publish what we find, including if it contradicts this post.
The data is not the point. The point is that a room with nothing in it is full every term and we have stopped pretending that is an accident.
There is a chair with your kid's name on it.
Free after-school for grades 4–8, six sites, no tuition, no test.