| H | I
| U | V
| X | Y | Z
Download PDF (323k)
Direct Instruction has limited evidence of effectiveness for beginning reading. Across four qualifying studies included in this review, the weighted mean effect size was +0.10.
There are no qualifying studies of Direct Instruction for upper elementary reading.
There are no qualifying studies of Direct Instruction for middle/high school reading.
Direct Instruction has limited evidence of effectiveness for reading for English Language Learners. The median effect size across studies was +0.21.
Direct Instruction/Corrective Reading has strong evidence of effectiveness for struggling readers. The four qualifying studies included in this review showed effect sizes of +0.25, +0.49, +0.16, and +1.22.
Direct Instruction is a highly structured, phonetic approach to reading instruction that emphasizes phonics, a step-by-step instructional approach, and direct teaching of comprehension skills, as well as extensive professional development and follow-up.
Corrective Reading provides intensive reading intervention based on Direct Instruction for upper-elementary students who are reading below grade level. It delivers tightly sequenced, carefully planned lessons that give struggling students the structure and practice necessary to become skilled, fluent readers and better learners. Four levels for decoding plus four for comprehension address the varied reading deficits and skill levels found among upper-elementary students.
For more on the reviews of Direct Instruction, read the BEE reviews of beginning reading, upper elementary reading, and reading for English Language Learners.
For more on the review of Direct Instruction/Corrective Reading, read the BEE review of struggling readers.
Direct Instruction has moderately strong evidence of effectiveness for elementary school comprehensive school reform, according to the Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center* (CSRQ).
No information available.
Direct Instruction has a strongest evidence of effectiveness rating in elementary and secondary schools, according to Dr. Geoffrey Borman.**
Direct Instruction provides reading, language arts, and math curricula with highly scripted and interactive lesson strategies, extensive writing, and frequent assessments of students.
For more on the reviews of Direct Instruction, read the CSRQ review of elementary school comprehensive school reform and the Borman K-12 meta-analysis. Links to the CSRQ and Borman reviews are available on the BEE.
For more information on Direct Instruction, visit www.nifdi.org or e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.
* The Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center (CSRQ)
The CSRQ was established at the American Institutes for Research through a grant from the US Department of Education and operated from 2003 to 2006. The CSRQ reviewed research on comprehensive school reform models. See www.csrq.org.
**Dr. Geoffrey Borman
Dr. Geoffrey Borman is a researcher at the University of Wisconsin. He published a review of research on the achievement effects of comprehensive school reform as follows:
Borman, G., Hewes G., Overman, L., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73, 2, 125-230.
For other reviews of research on education programs, see the Best Evidence Encyclopedia homepage at www.bestevidence.org.