Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Just How Effective is Direct Instruction?

  • Special Issue: Direct Instruction
  • Published:
Perspectives on Behavior Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite overwhelming evidence in support of Direct Instruction, this research-validated curriculum has not been widely embraced by teachers or school administrators. The Direct Instruction model, developed and refined by Engelmann and colleagues over the past 50 years, has been the focus of numerous research studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Although its efficacy cannot be doubted, the significance of Direct Instruction’s impact may be misunderstood. We attempt to clarify the importance of Direct Instruction with help from the binomial effect-size display. Binomial effect-size displays allow for intuitive and informative data-based decision making by clearly conveying the real-world importance of treatment outcomes through a juxtaposition of the relative proportions of success. The limitations of analyzing effect sizes in absolute terms are discussed. Using the binomial effect-size display as a framework, we present a series of dichotomies in an attempt to answer the question: Just how effective is Direct Instruction?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Educational Achievement Systems.

  • Barbash, S. (2012). Clear teaching: With direct instruction, Siegfried Engelmann discovered a better way of teaching. Education Consumers Foundation.

  • Baum, W. M. (2017). Understanding behaviorism: Behavior, culture, and evolution (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

  • Becker, W. C., & Gersten, R. (1982). A follow-up of Follow Through: The later effects of the direct instruction model on children in fifth and sixth grades. American Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312019001075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Engelmann, S. (1966). Teaching disadvantaged children in the preschool. Prentice-Hall.

  • Bereiter, C., & Kurland, M. (1981). A constructive look at follow through results. Interchange, 12(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01807392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beveridge, M., & Jerrams, A. (1981). Parental involvement in language development: An evaluation of a school-based parental assistance plan. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(3), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1981.tb02484.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binder, C., & Watkins, C. L. (1990). Precision teaching and direct instruction: Measurably superior instructional technology in schools. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 3(4), 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1990.tb00478.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 125–230. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073002125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branwhite, A. B. (1983). Boosting reading skills by direct instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53(3), 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1983.tb02561.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, K. (2020). The value of direct instruction for at-risk students. Journal of Education & Development, 4(2), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.20849/jed.v4i2.741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. Brookings Institute.

  • Coe, R. (September, 2002). It's the effect size, stupid: What effect size is and why it is important. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association annual conference: Exeter, England.

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Cole, K. N., & Dale, P. S. (1986). Direct language instruction and interactive language instruction with language delayed preschool children. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research, 29(2), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.2902.206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, K. N., Dale, P. S., & Mills, P. E. (1991). Individual differences in language delayed children's responses to direct and interactive preschool instruction. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11(1), 99–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112149101100110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, K. N., Dale, P. S., Mills, P. E., & Jenkins, J. R. (1993). Interaction between early intervention curricula and student characteristics. Exceptional Children, 60(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299306000103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, K. N., Mills, P. E., & Dale, P. S. (1989). A comparison of the effects of academic and cognitive curricula for young handicapped children one and two years post program. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 9(3), 110–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112148900900309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (Report No. OE-3800). National Center for Educational Statistics.

  • Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson.

  • Crawford, D. B., & Snider, V. E. (2000). Effective mathematics instruction: The importance of curriculum. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(2), 122–142 https://www.jstor.org/stable/42940521?seq=1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowe, E. C., Connor, C. M., & Petscher, Y. (2009). Examining the core: Relations among reading curricula, poverty, and first through third grade reading achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 47(3), 187–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Darch, C., Gersten, R., & Taylor, R. (1987). Evaluation of the Williamsburg County direct instruction program: Factors leading to success in rural elementary programs. Research in Rural Education, 4, 111–118 https://jrre.psu.edu/sites/default/files/2019-07/4-3_2.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darch, C., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1987). Teaching LD students critical reading skills: A systematic replication. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10(2), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, C. H. (1981). A second look at direct instruction. High School Journal, 64(4), 166–169 https://www.jstor.org/stable/40365849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, S. (2007). Teaching needs kids in our backwards system: 42 years of trying. ADI Press.

  • Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1992). Theory of instructional design: Principles and applications. Irvington Press.

  • Ferster, C. B., Culbertson, S., & Boren, M. C. (1975). Behavior principles (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall.

  • Fielding, G. D., Kame’enui, E., & Gersten, R. (1983). A comparison of an inquiry and a direct instruction approach to teaching legal concepts and applications to secondary school students. Journal of Educational Research, 76(5), 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1983.10885468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Sage.

  • Gregory, R. P., Hackney, C., & Gregory, N. M. (1982). Corrective Reading programme: An evaluation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1982.tb02501.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haring, N. G., & Krug, D. A. (1975). Evaluation of a program of systematic instructional procedures for extremely poor retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 79(6), 627–631 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1146852/.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H. Brookes.

  • Hasselbring, T., Sherwood, R., Bransford, J., Fleenor, K., Griffith, D., & Goin, L. (1987). An evaluation of a level-one instructional videodisc program. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 16(2), 151–169. https://doi.org/10.2190/br31-j510-cxm4-k41e.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

  • Hill, C. J., Bloom, H. S., Black, A. R., & Lipsey, M. W. (2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2(3), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00061.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, L. M. (2004). Biases of success rate differences shown in binomial effect size displays. Psychological Methods, 9(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.9.2.183.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Wills, H., Veerkamp, M., & Kaufman, J. (2008). Effects of small-group reading instruction and curriculum differences for students most at risk in kindergarten. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407313412.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, B., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., & Grossen, B. (1986). The effectiveness of videodisc instruction in teaching fractions to learning-disabled and remedial high school students. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8(2), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264348600800202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, B., Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1990). Student error patterns as a function of curriculum design: Teaching fractions to remedial high school students and high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949002300108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, M. M. (1978). Findings from the Follow Through planned variation study. U.S. Office of Education.

  • Kitz, W. R., & Thorpe, H. W. (1995). A comparison of the effectiveness of videodisc and traditional algebra instruction for college-age students with learning disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 16(5), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259501600506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, A. (1982). An experimental evaluation of a direct instruction programme (corrective reading) with remedial readers in a comprehensive school. Educational Psychology, 2(2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341820020202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., Puzio, K., Yun, C., Hebert, M. A., Steinka-Fry, K., Cole, M. W., Roberts, M., Anthony, K. S., & Busick, M. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms. (NCSER 2013-3000). National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/

  • Lloyd, J., Cullinan, D., Heins, E. D., & Epstein, M. H. (1980). Direct instruction: Effects on oral and written language comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 3(4), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, J., Epstein, M. H., & Cullinan, D. (1981). Direct Instruction for learning disabilities. In J. Gottlieb & S. S. Strichart (Eds.), Developmental theory and research in learning disabilities (pp. 41–45). University Park Press.

  • Lum, T., & Morton, L. L. (1984). Direct Instruction in spelling increases gain in spelling and reading skills. Special Education in Canada, 58(2), 41–45 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ299608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maggs, A., & Morath, P. (1976). Effects of direct verbal instruction on intellectual development of institutionalized moderately retarded children: A 2-year study. Journal of Special Education, 10(4), 357–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246697601000404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  • Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. J. (2003). Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

  • Mathews, H. M., Hirsch, S. E., & Therrien, W. J. (2018). Becoming critical consumers of research: Understanding replication. Intervention in School & Clinic, 53(5), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451217736863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, K. O. (1991). Problems with the BESD: A comment on Rosenthal’s “How are we doing in soft psychology?”. American Psychologist, 46(10), 1084–1086. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.46.10.1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, L. A. (1984). Long-term academic effects of the Direct Instruction Project Follow Through. Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 380–394. https://doi.org/10.1086/461371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L. J., & Carnine, D. (1989). Evaluating curriculum design in the context of active teaching. Remedial & Special Education, 10(4), 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258901000406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Educational Statistics. (2019). Digest of education statistics: 2018. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/

  • Pondiscio, R. (2018). Meta-analysis confirms effectiveness of an old school approach: Direct Instruction. Flypaper. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/direct-instruction-rodney-dangerfield-curriculum

  • Rachlin, H. (1991). Introduction to modern behaviorism (3rd ed.). W. H. Freeman.

  • Randolph, J. J., & Edmondson, R. S. (2005). Using the binomial effect size display (BESD) to present the magnitude of effect sizes to the evaluation audience. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 10, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.7275/zqwr-mx46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer, T., & Russell, T. (2017). Binomial effect size display. In M. Allen (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (p. 96). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411.n38.

  • Richardson, E., DiBenedetto, B., Christ, A., Press, M., & Winsberg, B. G. (1978). An assessment of two methods for remediating reading deficiencies. Reading Improvement, 15(2), 82–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. W., & Hesse, K. D. (1981). A morphemically based spelling program’ effect on spelling skills and spelling performance of seventh grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1981.10885356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B. (1976). Recent research on teaching behaviors and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 27(1), 61–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248717602700115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12–19 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ971753.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1990). How are we doing in soft psychology? American Psychologist, 45, 775–777. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.45.6.775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1991). Effect sizes: Pearson's correlation, its display via the BESD, and alternative indices. American Psychologist, 46(10), 1086–1087. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.46.10.1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1982). A simple general purpose display of magnitude of experimental effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 166–169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.74.2.166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sexton, C. W. (1989). Effectiveness of the DISTAR Reading I program in developing first graders’ language skills. Journal of Educational Research, 82(5), 289–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1989.10885908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. Appleton-Century-Crofts.

  • Rolf, K. R. & Slocum, T. (2021). Features of Direct Instruction: Interactive Lessons. Behavior Analysis in Practice.

  • Slocum, T. & Rolf, K. R. (2021). Features of Direct Instruction: Content analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice.

  • Slocum, T. A. (2004). Direct instruction: The big ideas. In D. J. Moran & R. W. Malott (Eds.), Evidence-based educational methods (pp. 81–94). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012506041-7/50007-3.

  • Slocum, T. A., Detrich, R., Wilczynski, S. M., Spencer, T. D., Lewis, T., & Wolfe, K. (2014). The evidence-based practice of applied behavior analysis. The Behavior Analyst, 37(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-014-0005-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. (2013). What is evidence-based behavior analysis? The Behavior Analyst, 36(1), 7–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03392290.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Stebbins, L. B., St Pierre, R. G., Proper, E. C., Anderson, R. B., & Cerva, T. R. (1977). Education as experimentation: A planned variation model (Vol. IV-A). ABT Associates.

  • Stein, C. L., & Goldman, J. (1980). Beginning reading instruction for children with minimal brain dysfunction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13(4), 52–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948001300409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockard, J. (2010). Promoting reading achievement and countering the “fourth-grade slump”: The impact of direct instruction on reading achievement in fifth grade. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 15(3), 218–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2010.495687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockard, J. (2011). Increasing reading skills in rural areas: An analysis of three school districts. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(8), 1–19 https://jrre.psu.edu/sites/default/files/2019-08/26-8.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2018). The effectiveness of direct instruction curricula: A meta-analysis of a half century of research. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317751919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2020). All students can succeed: A half century of research on the effectiveness of Direct Instruction. Lexington Books.

  • Strahan, R. F. (1991). Remarks on the binary effect size display. American Psychologist, 46(10), 1083–1084. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.46.10.1083.b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Summerell, S., & Brannigan, G. G. (1977). Comparison of reading programs for children with low levels of reading readiness. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 44(3), 743–746. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1977.44.3.743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallmadge, G. K. (1977). The Joint Dissemination Review Panel ideabook. National Institute of Education.

  • Tarver, S. G., & Jung, J. S. (1995). A comparison of mathematics achievement and mathematics attitudes of first and second graders instructed with either a discovery-learning mathematics curriculum or a direct instruction curriculum. Effective School Practices, 14(1), 49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, K. N., & Schumacker, R. E. (1997). An evaluation of Rosenthal and Rubin’s binomial effect size display. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, 22(1), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986022001109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travers, J. C., Cook, B. G., Therrien, W. J., & Coyne, M. D. (2016). Replication and special education. Remedial & Special Education, 37, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516648462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargas, J. S. (2013). Behavior analysis for effective teaching (2nd ed.). Routledge.

  • Vitale, M. R., & Romance, N. R. (1992). Using videodisk instruction in an elementary science methods course: Remediating science knowledge deficiencies and facilitating science teaching attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(9), 915–928. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, H. M., McConnell, S., Walker, J. L., Clarke, J. Y., Todis, B., Cohen, G., & Rankin, R. (1983). Initial analysis of the ACCEPTS curriculum: Efficacy of instructional and behavior management procedures for improving the social adjustment of handicapped children. Analysis & Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3(1), 105–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-4684(83)90029-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, C. L. (1997). Project Follow Through: A case study of contingencies influencing instructional practices of the educational establishment. Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.

  • Wood, T. W. (2014). Engelmann’s Direct Instruction: Selected writings from the past half century. NIFDI Press.

  • Woodward, J., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1988). Teaching problem solving through computer simulations. American Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312025001072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, J., Carnine, D., Gersten, R., Gleason, M., Johnson, G., & Collins, M. (1986). Applying instructional design principles to CAI for mildly handicapped students: Four recently conducted studies. Journal of Special Education Technology, 8(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264348600800103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Child Study Center, Cook Children’s Health Care System, 1300 West Lancaster Avenue, Fort Worth, TX, 76102, USA

    Lee Mason & Maria Otero

  2. ANSERS Institute, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, USA

    Lee Mason

  3. Department of Behavior Analysis, University of North Texas, Fort Worth, USA

    Maria Otero

Authors
  1. Lee Mason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Otero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lee Mason.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

We have no explicit conflicts of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mason, L., Otero, M. Just How Effective is Direct Instruction?. Perspect Behav Sci 44, 225–244 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00295-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00295-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation