Even though research on Direct Instruction has been available for nearly 50 years, more continues to appear. Current research examines both the effectiveness of Direct Instruction programs and the most effective ways to deliver them.
The recent studies confirm the findings of earlier decades. Efficacy studies continue to find that students in Direct Instruction have higher achievement scores than those using other programs. These results occur with students in general education and those in special education. They occur when comparisons are made to basal texts or to “constructivist” approaches. They occur with preschoolers through adults. They occur with students from many different communities and demographic backgrounds.
Recent work also continues to examine how teachers and schools can be most effective in their use of Direct Instruction programs. The research confirms the importance of following NIFDI guidelines in implementation. The research also highlights the importance of having strong training and coaching programs for teachers and supportive administrative structures.
Because there is such a large amount of research literature on Direct Instruction, a number of researchers have systematically summarized the findings. These summaries have included both extensive reviews of the literature and statistical meta-analyses. Again, these summaries consistently find strong evidence of Direct Instruction’s effectiveness.
NIFDI is dedicated to ensuring that research on Direct Instruction is accessible to teachers, parents, policy makers and scholars throughout the world. It is also dedicated to promoting research on Direct Instruction and its effective implementation. NIFDI provides several resources for those interested in learning more about Direct Instruction.
Literature on Direct Instruction is extensive and diverse, spanning almost fifty years. NIFDI’s Bibliography of Direct Instruction provides complete bibliographic citations to this literature. It lists the Direct Instruction programs, studies of DI’s effectiveness, and a wide variety of other related work including criticisms and responses, textbooks, theoretical writings, and studies that were instrumental in the development of the programs. Researchers are encouraged to submit their studies of the Engelmann-Becker tradition of Direct Instruction for inclusion in the bibliography. Inquiries and submissions should be sent to research@nifdi.org.
Many of the studies listed in the Bibliography are included in NIFDI’s searchable research database. Articles and books are indexed on a variety of dimensions, allowing users to search for material that is most relevant to their interests. All entries are abstracted and users may request copies of many of the entries.
NIFDI also supports the development of research on Direct Instruction through research awards and fellowships. Awards include fellowships to support graduate student dissertation or thesis projects and postdoctoral fellowships to support emerging and/or established scholars.
Scholars from all over the world conduct research on Direct Instruction. Some serve on the faculties of colleges and universities, some work in institutes devoted solely to research, some are independent researchers, and some are teacher scholars, doing action research in their classrooms. People doing research on Direct Instruction are invited to join the Direct Instruction Research Group. The NIFDI Research Office periodically sends information to the group on recent research, possible research sites, funding, and other areas of potential interest. With members’ permission help with networking and collaboration is also provided.
Want to be included in the Directory of Researchers?
Scientific developments are based on carefully developed theory and rigorous empirical tests. The Direct Instruction approach to teaching exemplifies this tradition, with a strong theoretical base, the continual incorporation of research in program development, and hundreds of replications of research results. These results demonstrate the programs’ strong efficacy in varied settings and with different populations.
The theoretical propositions that underlie Direct Instruction are summarized and tested in books such as Conceptual Learning (1969), Theory of Instruction: Principles and Applications (1982), Inferred Functions of Performance and Learning (2004), and Could John Stuart Mill Have Saved Our Schools? (2004).These writings delineate the logical basis for DI’s basic principles that:
1) all children can learn when instruction is systematic, explicit, and efficient; and
2) poor achievement does not result from poor students, but from poor teaching.
They present the suppositions in formal logical terms, provide empirical tests of the theoretical propositions, and link the analyses to classic philosophical writings.
The development of DI programs is based on these theoretical principles and incorporates carefully designed research at all stages. DI authors pay particular attention to ensuring that the instructional programs are logical, explicit, and systematic, so they try out each element of a program to make sure it works. When students do not understand something, the authors assume that there is a problem in the program. They identify the problem, alter the instructional design, and then test it again. Once the instructional programs are fully drafted they are field tested in schools around the country. The sites are carefully selected to represent varied demographic and geographical settings. Feedback from these sites is used to again revise the programs as needed. No other instructional programs use such careful research procedures, or such a fully developed theoretical base, in their construction and design.
Once programs are published and widely disseminated, scholars from around the world examine their efficacy. Over the last five decades hundreds of studies of the efficacy of Direct Instruction have been conducted. These studies have involved all aspects of the DI curriculum, such as reading, math, language and spelling. They have included students in rural, suburban, and urban settings; students from preschool to adulthood; students with all types of demographic characteristics and ability levels; and students in the United States and in other countries. The studies have used a wide range of designs such as randomized control trials, large scale multi-site implementations, longitudinal studies, and single subject designs. This research has consistently found strong evidence that students exposed to Direct Instruction have higher achievement than those using other programs.
Extensive literature reviews and meta-analyses summarize this literature. Bibliographic citations of much of this literature are included in NIFDI’s Comprehensive Bibliography of the DI literature. Substantial proportions of this research are also included in NIFDI’s searchable database of DI related writings, and new research continues to appear.
