Results of Direct Instruction Reading Program Evaluation Longitudinal Results: First Through Third Grade 2000-2003
Susan Notes: Here's the executive summary for a report showing the results of a three-year longitudinal study examining Direct
Instruction reading in urban and suburban schools in Southeast Wisconsin.
This report summarizes the results of a three-year longitudinal study examining Direct Instruction reading in urban and suburban schools in Southeast Wisconsin. Included in this report is an examination of students' reading achievement, classroom characteristics associated with successful reading instruction, observational data of teachers' classroom management and instructional practice, survey and interview data on teacher's views on reading instruction, and rates of special education referrals and placements in Direct Instruction and comparison schools.
Results on standardized measures of reading achievement revealed:
* Students in first, second, and third grade receiving Direct Instruction scored significantly lower on their overall reading achievement than students receiving more traditional forms of reading instruction. These results were consistent in urban and suburban schools.
* Students in first, second, and third grade receiving Direct Instruction scored significantly lower on measures of comprehension than students receiving more traditional forms of reading instruction.
* First graders in an urban school district receiving Direct Instruction scored significantly lower on decoding and comprehension than students receiving more traditional forms of reading instruction and these results were consistent across three consecutive school years.
* Overall, on measures of reading achievement students receiving more traditional forms of reading instruction in urban and suburban school districts display significantly greater gains than students receiving Direct Instruction.
Additional results illustrated:
* The majority of teachers purport that DI should be limited in its use and not implemented as a primary reading program
* Elementary DI and Non-DI teachers, regardless of the grade they teach, who practice mild and gentile [sic]management/control, initiate their students to display their knowledge,encourage student independence, and have students that are content and have positive affect, have classes that perform significantly better in reading than teachers who do not evidence those practices.
* Many teachers using Direct Instruction saw it as a means for controlling student behavior and were likely to extend the underlying instructional tenets of Direct Instruction into other aspects of their teaching.
* Urban DI teachers express great concern over DI's lack of sensitivity to issues of poverty, culture, and race;
* Urban DI teachers believe DI texts disregard urban students' lack of exposure to life occurrences that are more of an everyday occurrence for middle-class, suburban students;
* Suburban DI teachers thought DI worthwhile as a corrective and supplementary reading
* Most teachers, regardless of the reading curriculum they use, tend to use a variety of
materials and strategies during their reading instruction. Furthermore, there are more similarities than differences in the materials and strategies used between teachers using Direct Instruction and those using a more traditional form of reading instruction.
Randall J. Ryder, Jen L. Sekulski, Anna Silberg, University of Wisconsin-Mi
INDEX OF RESEARCH THAT COUNTS