DOCSLIB.ORG

Special Education and Direct Instruction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Special Education and Direct Instruction DIANE KINDER, University of Washington, Tacoma; RICHARD KUBINA, The Pennsylvania State University; NANCY E. MARCHAND-MARTELLA, Eastern Washington University meet students’ needs and to ensure their Special Education and access in the general curriculum (34 CFR 300.24[b][3] as cited in Bateman & Linden, Direct Instruction: An 1998). This instruction may differ in terms of how it is provided (e.g., one-on-one, small Effective Combination groups, using sign language), where it is pro- vided (e.g., resource room, separate classroom, residential school), or what curriculum is used (e.g., Direct Instruction programs, Touch Math, Abstract: This paper considers the unique Edmark Reading). and successful combination of using Direct Instruction programs with special education populations. The introduction establishes the Two of the critical elements of “specially need for valid, scientifically based materials. designed” instruction include individualization Next is a description of studies using Direct and validation (Fuchs, 1996; Fuchs & Fuchs, Instruction with students who have high-inci- 1995). Individualization refers to developing dence disabilities. Thirty-seven studies were instruction with an individual student’s needs found across academic areas. In only 3 of the 37 studies did students who were in mind—as the student’s needs change, so instructed with other materials fair better does the treatment (Fuchs, 1996). Validation than the students who received Direct pertains to rigorous experimental studies that Instruction. Next, a research review of 8 have been conducted over time yielding con- studies involving Direct Instruction and stu- dents with low-incidence disabilities is pre- verging evidence. “When practiced most effec- sented. These studies showed positive effects tively and ethically, special education is for this population, with one investigation characterized by the use of research-based showing higher effects when another compo- teaching methods” (Heward, 2003, p. 38). nent (Discrimination Learning Theory) was added to Distar Arithmetic than when Distar Arithmetic was used alone. In all, 45 studies Interestingly, the 2004 reauthorized IDEA were found across student disability cate- (Council for Exceptional Children, 2004) gories with over 90% noting positive effects includes increased focus on the use of scientif- for Direct Instruction programs. Finally, con- ically based instructional practices and pro- clusions are drawn regarding the effective combination of Direct Instruction and special grams and peer-reviewed research. For education, and further research is called for example, a special rule for determining eligi- particularly in the areas of language, bility was made noting that students cannot spelling, writing, and mathematics. be qualified for special education services if they lack appropriate instruction in reading (as The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA) requires “specially designed” instruction for students with dis- abilities to meet their unique needs. Specially Journal of Direct Instruction, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1–36. Address designed instruction pertains to adapting con- correspondence to Nancy Marchand-Martella at tent, methodology, or delivery of instruction to [email protected] Journal of Direct Instruction 1 defined in section 1208[3] of the Elementary cial education services and found Direct and Secondary Education Act of 1965) or Instruction to be one of only seven interven- mathematics. Further, local educational agen- tions with strong evidence of success. Thus, it cies may use a process that determines if stu- is no surprise that Direct Instruction is often dents respond to scientific, research-based referred to as a program for special education intervention as part of the evaluation proce- or at-risk students (Watkins & Slocum, 2004). dures for identifying a specific learning disabil- ity. This focus on research-based intervention In fact, Direct Instruction was initially used to ensures that students are qualified for special teach young, at-risk children as part of the education services for the “right” reasons, and largest educational study in U.S. history— not due to an absence of scientifically based Project Follow Through—which compared nine instructional programs. different educational approaches to determine the best instructional practice for low-income, Prior to the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA, the at-risk children in kindergarten through third No Child Left Behind legislation expected grade (Kennedy, 1978; Stebbins, St. Pierre, educators to demonstrate that all children can Proper, Anderson, & Cerva, 1977; Watkins, make progress, which led to an increased focus 1997). Project Follow Through demonstrated on the use of valid, scientifically based materi- that the Direct Instruction model for teaching als (Allbritten, Mainzer, & Ziegler, 2004). reading, language, and arithmetic had signifi- Thus, states, districts, and schools have been cant positive effects on basic, cognitive–con- reviewing the research base supporting pub- ceptual, and affective skills. lished programs to find curricula that will be effective, especially with students receiving Much of the Project Follow Through research special education. These reviews conclude took place prior to national legislation requir- that “More than any other commercially avail- ing special education, at a time when students able instructional programs, Direct Instruction with mild disabilities were typically taught in is supported by research” (Watkins & Slocum, general education classrooms. In an effort to 2004, p. 57). Several independent reviews of assess the effectiveness of Direct Instruction research add to this strong support, with par- for students with disabilities, Gersten, Becker, ticular focus on students with special needs Heiry, and White (1984) analyzed data previ- (Carnine, Silbert, Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2004). ously collected from Direct Instruction Follow For example, White (1988) found 25 investiga- Through participants including the intellec- tions in which Direct Instruction was com- tual/cognitive ability variable. Gersten et al. pared to another treatment. Not 1 of the 25 found that students in all IQ groups had the studies showed results favoring the compari- same pattern of growth from kindergarten to son groups; 53% of the outcomes significantly first, second, and third grades. That is, even favored Direct Instruction with an average those students with low IQs maintained con- effect size of .84. Further, Adams and sistent gains and gained the same amount per Engelmann (1996) analyzed 37 research stud- year as those with higher IQs. This investiga- ies involving Direct Instruction programs com- tion of the use of Direct Instruction to teach pared to other treatments. When those studies students with varied intellectual abilities led involving special education students (n = 21) the way for many additional studies. were analyzed separately, the mean effect size was .90 (considered a large magnitude of The purpose of this paper is to review pub- change from pre- to posttest assessments). lished investigations where Direct Instruction Finally, Forness, Kavale, Blum, and Lloyd programs were used with special education (1997) conducted an analysis of various inter- populations. Specifically, the review centers on vention programs for students receiving spe- two populations of students with special 2 Winter 2005 needs—those with high-incidence disabilities spelling, writing, and mathematics), where (e.g., learning disabilities, communication dis- appropriate. Tables were devised to present orders, behavior disorders, mild mental retarda- specific details regarding these studies. Each tion) and those with low-incidence disabilities table identifies: (a) researchers and year of (e.g., autism, traumatic brain injuries, moder- publication of the study; (b) Direct ate to severe mental retardation). Instruction programs used; (c) number of par- ticipating students, including the number in the intervention group and the number in the Literature Search control group; (d) participant information including disability, mean age and age range, Search procedures for the articles in this review included: (a) hand searches of all issues and IQ and IQ range; (e) research design; (f) of ADI News, DI News, Effective School Practices, research purpose; (g) intervention details; (h) and Journal of Direct Instruction (publications outcome measures; and (i) findings. (Note: If produced by the Association for Direct information is missing in the tables with Instruction—www.adihome.org); (b) ancestral regard to these details, it was not provided in searches of references in key Direct the studies.) Instruction texts including Research on Direct Instruction: 25 Years Beyond DISTAR (Adams & Direct Instruction Research Engelmann, 1996), Designing Effective With Students With Mathematics Instruction: A Direct Instruction High-Incidence Disabilities Approach (Stein, Silbert, & Carnine, 1997), As previously stated, 37 studies investigating Direct Instruction Reading (Carnine et al., 2004), the effects of Direct Instruction on partici- and Introduction to Direct Instruction (Marchand- pants with high-incidence disabilities were Martella, Slocum, & Martella, 2004); (c) found. These studies spanned the mid-1970s ERIC and PsycINFO computerized searches to 2005. The participants in the majority of using various search terms related to Direct these studies (n = 22) were students with Instruction; and (d) examination
Load more

Recommended publications
  • AN INTERVENTION SPECIALIST's JOURNEY THROUGH the ZONE of PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT a Dissertation Submitted to the Kent State Univ
    AN INTERVENTION SPECIALIST’S JOURNEY THROUGH THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Carol A. Carrig May, 2016 © Copyright, 2016 by Carol A. Carrig All Rights Reserved ii A dissertation written by Carol A. Carrig B.S., Kent State University, 1978 M.Ed., Cleveland State University, 2004 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2016 Approved by _________________________, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Alicia R. Crowe _________________________, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Jennifer L. Walton-Fisette _________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Melody Tankersley Accepted by _________________________, Director, School of Teaching, Learning and Alexa L. Sandmann Curriculum Studies _________________________, Interim Dean, College of Education, Health Mark A. Kretovics and Human Services iii CARRIG, CAROL A., Ph.D., May 2016 Teaching, Learning and Curriculum Studies AN INTERVENTION SPECIALIST’S JOURNEY THROUGH THE ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT (269 pp.) Co-Directors of Dissertation: Alicia R. Crowe, Ph.D. Jennifer L. Walton-Fisette, Ph.D. This self-study focused of an intervention specialist’s decision-making process in designing instruction for students with special needs and those at risk in learning. Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory and the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) provided the lens through which this research was conceptualized and viewed. The purpose of this research study was to utilize a reflective thinking practice in examining my part of the teaching/learning cycle discerning what information lead to decisions in creating scaffolds for students’ zone of proximal development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Components of Direct Instruction*
    CATHY L. WATKINS, California State University, Stanislaus and TIMOTHY A. SLOCUM, Utah State University Instruction is designed to serve this purpose. The Components Accomplishing this goal requires keen atten- tion to all aspects of teaching. It would be of Direct Instruction* much easier if we could focus on one or two “key issues” and produce measurably superior instruction, but this is not the case. Producing highly effective teaching requires that we Objectives attend to a wide variety of details concerning After studying this chapter you should be able the design, organization, and delivery of to instruction. If any one element of instruction is not done well, high-quality instruction in 1. Identify the three major elements of Direct other areas may not compensate for it. For Instruction. example, superior instructional delivery cannot make up for poorly designed instructional 2. Explain what it means to teach a general materials. Likewise, well-designed programs case. cannot compensate for poor organization. 3. Describe each of the five juxtaposition prin- Three main components enable Direct ciples and explain how they contribute to Instruction to accomplish the goal of teaching clear communication. all children effectively and efficiently: (a) pro- gram design that identifies concepts, rules, 4. Explain the shifts that occur in formats over strategies, and “big ideas” to be taught and time. clear communication through carefully con- 5. Explain what tracks are and how track design structed instructional programs to teach these; differs from more traditional instruction. (b) organization of instruction, including scheduling, grouping, and ongoing progress 6. Explain the guidelines for sequencing tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Perspectives on Individual Instruction in Extension Education Lloyd William Wade Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1976 Perspectives on individual instruction in extension education Lloyd William Wade Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Administration Commons, and the Adult and Continuing Education and Teaching Commons Recommended Citation Wade, Lloyd William, "Perspectives on individual instruction in extension education " (1976). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 6230. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/6230 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image.
    [Show full text]
  • Progressive Education: Why It's Hard to Beat, but Also Hard to Find
    Bank Street College of Education Educate Progressive Education in Context College History and Archives 2015 Progressive Education: Why it's Hard to Beat, But Also Hard to Find Alfie ohnK Follow this and additional works at: https://educate.bankstreet.edu/progressive Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, Educational Methods Commons, and the Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons Recommended Citation Kohn, A. (2015). Progressive Education: Why it's Hard to Beat, But Also Hard to Find. Bank Street College of Education. Retrieved from https://educate.bankstreet.edu/progressive/2 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the College History and Archives at Educate. It has been accepted for inclusion in Progressive Education in Context by an authorized administrator of Educate. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Progressive Education Why It’s Hard to Beat, But Also Hard to Find By Alfie Kohn If progressive education doesn’t lend itself to a single fixed definition, that seems fitting in light of its reputation for resisting conformity and standardization. Any two educators who describe themselves as sympathetic to this tradition may well see it differently, or at least disagree about which features are the most important. Talk to enough progressive educators, in fact, and you’ll begin to notice certain paradoxes: Some people focus on the unique needs of individual students, while oth- ers invoke the importance of a community of learners; some describe learning as a process, more journey than destination, while others believe that tasks should result in authentic products that can be shared.[1] What It Is Despite such variations, there are enough elements on which most of us can agree so that a common core of progressive education emerges, however hazily.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Instruction Versus Direct Instruction: Teaching Content Area Vocabulary Words to High School Students with Reading Disabilities
    Traditional Instruction Versus Direct Instruction: Teaching Content Area Vocabulary Words to High School Students with Reading Disabilities Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctorate of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Kristall J. Graham Day, M.A. Graduate Program in Education The Ohio State University 2010 Committee: Dr. Ralph Gardner, III, Advisor Dr. Gwendolyn Cartledge Dr. Moira Konrad Copyright by Kristall J. Day 2010 Abstract Vocabulary knowledge impacts every area of reading achievement, yet important words are often not explicitly taught. There is published research to support the usage of direct instruction to teach vocabulary to younger children, but there are limited studies that have investigated the effects of direct instruction in teaching vocabulary to high school students with reading disabilities. The purpose of the current study was to compare the effects of the traditional approach (using context and the dictionary) to a direct instruction approach (REWARDS Plus scripted curriculum) when teaching science vocabulary words to high school students with reading disabilities. The study included three participants with reading disabilities in the 11th and 12th grades. An alternating treatments design counterbalanced across participants was used to compare the two methods of instruction. Traditional instruction included the methods employed in most high schools where students are asked to use the context of the sentence or a dictionary to figure out the meaning of unknown words. Direct instruction included the REWARDS Plus program, a published, scripted curriculum that utilizes explicit, systematic instruction. Data were collected on lesson assessments, maintenance assessments, generalization writing samples, and comprehension writing samples.
    [Show full text]
  • A Minefield of Dreams
    A MINEFIELD OF DREAMS TRIUMPHS AND TRAVAILS OF INDEPENDENT WRITING PROGRAMS Edited by Justin Everett and Cristina Hanganu-Bresch A MINEFIELD OF DREAMS: TRIUMPHS AND TRAVAILS OF INDEPENDENT WRITING PROGRAMS PERSPECTIVES ON WRITING Series Editors, Susan H. McLeod and Rich Rice The Perspectives on Writing series addresses writing studies in a broad sense. Consistent with the wide ranging approaches characteristic of teaching and scholarship in writing across the curriculum, the series presents works that take divergent perspectives on working as a writer, teaching writing, administering writing programs, and studying writing in its various forms. The WAC Clearinghouse, Colorado State University Open Press, and University Press of Colorado are collaborating so that these books will be widely available through free digital distribution and low-cost print editions. The publishers and the Series editors are committed to the principle that knowledge should freely circulate. We see the opportunities that new technologies have for further de- mocratizing knowledge. And we see that to share the power of writing is to share the means for all to articulate their needs, interest, and learning into the great experiment of literacy. Recent Books in the Series Chris M. Anson and Jessie L. Moore (Eds.), Critical Transitions: Writing and the Question of Transfer (2017) Joanne Addison and Sharon James McGee, Writing and School Reform: Writing Instruction in the Age of Common Core and Standardized Testing (2017) Lisa Emerson, The Forgotten Tribe: Scientists as Writers (2017) Jacob S. Blumner and Pamela B. Childers (Eds.), WAC Partnerships Between Secondary and Postsecondary Institutions (2015) Nathan Shepley, Placing the History of College Writing: Stories from the Incom- plete Archive (2015) Asao B.
    [Show full text]
  • A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Research on Instruction
    For more information visit McREL at www.mcrel.org Thank you for downloading A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Research on Instruction from the McREL Web site. Skip introduction Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL) is a private nonprofit corporation located in Denver, Colorado. We provide field tested, research-based products and services in the following areas: • Assessment, Accountability, • Mathematics and Data Use • Professional Development • Curriculum • Rural Education • Diversity • School Improvement and • Early Childhood Education Reform • Education Technology • Science • Instruction • Standards • Leadership and Organization • Teacher Preparation and Development Retention • Literacy PDFPDFdownload For more information visit McREL at www.mcrel.org Copyright Information u This site and its contents are Copyright © 1995–2006 McREL except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved. The McREL logo and “Converting Information to Knowledge” are trademarks of McREL. Other trademarks are the properties of the respective owners, and may or may not be used under license. Permission is granted to reproduce, store and/or distribute the materials appearing on this web site with the following limits: • Materials may be reproduced, stored and/or distributed for informational and educational uses, but in no case may they be used for profit or commercially without McREL’s prior written permission. • Materials may not be modified, altered or edited in any way without the express permission of Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning. Please contact McREL. • This copyright page must be included with any materials from this web site that are reproduced, stored and/or distributed, except for personal use. • McREL must be notified when materials are reproduced, stored and/or distributed, except for personal use.
    [Show full text]
  • 7Th Annual Ctconf-Opt.Pdf
    Proceedings of The Ninth Annual & Seventh International Conference on Critical Thinking and . Educational ReforDl August 6-9, 1989 Henry Steel Commager Dean ofAmerican Historians, addressing the First International Conference on Critical Thinking and Educational Reform Under the Auspices of the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique and Sonoma State University From Previous Conferences: Michael SCriven llarriySiegel NeUPostman WID Robinson TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Histotyofthe Conference......................................................................... 7 The OrganJzation ofthe Conference................................................... 9 Conference'IheIne........................................................................................ 10 Map/Abbreviations....................................................................................... 15 Schedule............................................................................................................. 17 Presenters and Abstracts 46 Panels. 149 SpecJal Inte~t Groups............................................................................. 158 Videotape Resources ~ : ':........................ 159 National Council for Excellence inCritical1binking Instruction............................................................ 162 Center Description 164 Richard W. Paul Director, Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique Introduction Critical Thinking: What, Why, and How The Logically mogical Animal Ironically. humans are not simply the only
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Direct Instruction and Cooperative Retelling Using a Collaborative
    The Impact of Direct Instruction and Cooperative Retelling using a Collaborative Podcasting tool on the Narrative Writing Skills of Upper Elementary School Children in the Inclusive Classroom Ofra Aslan A Thesis In the Department of Education Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Educational Technology) at Concordia University Montreal, Québec, Canada December, 2011 Ofra Aslan, 2011 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Ofra Aslan Entitled: The Impact of Direct instruction and Cooperative Retelling using a Collaborative Podcasting tool on the Narrative Writing Skills of upper Elementary School Children in the Inclusive Classroom and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Educational Technology) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: Chair Dr. C. Daniel-Hughes External Examiner Dr. L. Godard External to Program Dr. D. Pariser Examiner Dr. P. Abrami Examiner Dr. R. Bernard Thesis Supervisor Dr. R. Schmid Approved by Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director Dr. V. Venkatesh, Graduate Program Director December 12, 2011 Dr. B. Lewis, Dean, Faculty of Arts and Science ii ABSTRACT The Impact of Direct Instruction and Cooperative Retelling using a Collaborative Podcasting tool on the Narrative Writing Skills of Upper Elementary School Children in the Inclusive Classroom Ofra Aslan, Ph.D. Concordia University, 2011 To address the writing challenges experienced by many Normally Achieving students (NA) and students with learning disabilities (LD) in the inclusive classroom, this quasi-experiment study examined the outcomes of two technology-supported instructional interventions and an untreated control group with pretest and posttests, and posttest only, aimed at improving the narrative writing skills of cycle 3 (Grades 5 and 6) students.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: a Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research
    RERXXX10.3102/0034654317751919Stockard et al.Effectiveness of Direct Instruction 751919research-article2018 Review of Educational Research Month 201X, Vol. XX, No. X, pp. 1 –29 DOI: 10.3102/0034654317751919 © 2018 AERA. http://rer.aera.net The Effectiveness of Direct Instruction Curricula: A Meta-Analysis of a Half Century of Research Jean Stockard and Timothy W. Wood University of Oregon Cristy Coughlin Safe and Civil Schools Caitlin Rasplica Khoury The Children’s Clinic, P.C. Quantitative mixed models were used to examine literature published from 1966 through 2016 on the effectiveness of Direct Instruction. Analyses were based on 328 studies involving 413 study designs and almost 4,000 effects. Results are reported for the total set and subareas regarding reading, math, language, spelling, and multiple or other aca- demic subjects; ability measures; affective outcomes; teacher and parent views; and single-subject designs. All of the estimated effects were posi- tive and all were statistically significant except results from metaregres- sions involving affective outcomes. Characteristics of the publications, methodology, and sample were not systematically related to effect esti- mates. Effects showed little decline during maintenance, and effects for academic subjects were greater when students had more exposure to the programs. Estimated effects were educationally significant, moderate to large when using the traditional psychological benchmarks, and similar in magnitude to effect sizes that reflect performance gaps between more and less advantaged students. K EYWORDS: Direct Instruction, meta-analysis, academic achievement The importance of explicit and systematic instruction has become a central element of discussions of effective instruction (e.g., National Reading Panel, 2000). Direct Instruction (DI), developed by Siegfried Engelmann and his col- laborators beginning in the 1960s, is often cited as an example.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 4: Direct Instruction
    04-Dell’Olio-45141.qxd 1/23/2007 2:18 PM Page 71 chapter Direct Instruction hen I ( J. M. D.) began my teacher preparation program in the late 1970s, I W was astonished to discover that elementary classrooms looked very different from the ones I remembered from the 1950s and 1960s. As I observed and partici- pated in classrooms at various grade levels, I enjoyed watching many types of instruc- tion, most of them models of teaching I had never seen before in a classroom. I also saw more familiar instruction. In time, however, it was clear to me that even in these conventional lessons, the teachers were doing some things that differed from the 04-Dell’Olio-45141.qxd 1/23/2007 2:18 PM Page 72 PART 2 The Models of Teaching instruction of my childhood experience. In my methods course, I learned to under- stand and appreciate those differences. Direct instruction, once described as interactive teaching (Stallings, 1975; Stallings, Cory, Fairweather, & Needles, 1978; Stallings, Needles, & Stayrook, 1979) and active teaching (Brophy & Good, 1986), is probably the model of teaching you are also most familiar with from your own K–12 school experiences. Direct instruc- tion is the kind of teaching children usually mimic when they play school. Your knowledge of the characteristics of well-designed direct instruction will serve you well when you need to develop a traditional lesson. We also believe you will have a greater understanding and appreciation of hands-on, discovery models of teaching if you learn the components and structure of a strong direct instruction lesson.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Introduction to Direct Instruction
    SCIENCE OF LEARNING / OVERVIEW Direct Instruction A brief introduction to direct instruction What is direct instruction? An overview Direct instruction is one of the most widely used methods of teaching, and it begins with the “clear and systematic presentation of knowledge” with the goal of helping students to develop background knowledge so that they may apply and link it to new knowledge (Kim & Axelrod, 2005). Direct instruction does not mean that learning is passive, or that teaching is reduced to drill- and-practice. Direct instruction is a systematic approach to teaching in which the teacher is very explicit about what students are to learn, the language of instruction clear, and allows teachers the opportunity to monitor their students while teaching, and to provide constructive feedback. Direct instruction should not be confused with rote instruction, which is an approach that requires students to memorize answers and repeat them in rote-like fashion. Direct instruction scaffolds instruction to meet the needs of each individual student. Direct instruction was an instructional method originally designed to address at-risk students within Baltimore public schools by Siegfried Engelmann, a professor at Johns Hopkins University. The program was first developed as DISTAR, or “Direct Instruction System for Teaching Arithmetic and Reading,” and focused on reading and maths. The original aim of direct instruction was to focus on reading instruction, and get all students to the same reading level using a reading strategy called phonics. How effective is direct instruction? The effectiveness of direct instruction has been well documented. Project Follow Through, a federally-funded educational programme in the United States, demonstrated empirical evidence for direct instruction as the most effective method (out of 22 forms of instruction), which produced positive results for teaching reading, arithmetic, language, spelling, and positive self- esteem.
    [Show full text]