An Evaluation of the Direct Instruction Program
Kecia L. Addison
Mary E. Yakimowski
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 warrants that instructional practices be “scientific-based.” Direct Instruction is one program often cited as scientifically-based and implemented in reform efforts. More specifically, Direct Instruction is a school reform model designed to increase learning by systematically developing background knowledge, applying that knowledge, and linking it to new knowledge (Ligas, 2002). First implemented in Baltimore City Public Schools (City Schools) in 1996-97, the examination of the effectiveness of Direct Instruction comes at a promising time, as education research and federal funding continue a strong movement in the direction of comprehensive school reform. In City Schools, we have 16 schools serving 6,582 students receiving Direct Instruction, which is a teacher-centered instructional model based on highly structured lessons, careful sequencing, and repetition.
To investigate the impact of Direct Instruction in Baltimore City Public Schools, nine overarching questions were developed. These questions address issues related to implementation, perceptions, student characteristics, and implementation costs. Additionally, outcome information on attendance and achievement are presented. A special component on how achievement in Direct Instruction compared to those using City Schools curricula and those between the two is also presented in this evaluation report. This evaluation design is built upon previous research, including a meta-analytical study and research conducted by Johns Hopkins University.
Results show that of the 16 schools within City Schools implementing Direct Instruction, 13 schools receive Title I funding. Additionally, 13 schools are in reconstitution status in 2002-03. There are more female students in Direct Instruction schools than males, 54.3% and 45.8% respectively. Additionally, 74.1% of students in Direction Instruction schools are African American. In attempting to understand the view of the Direct Instruction model, perceptual data from teachers, principals, and parents was gathered using the Westat survey. Approximately 80% of teachers responded positively about the ability of Direct Instruction to improve or maintain students’ affective behavior. Direct Instruction parents were more satisfied than their non-Direct instruction counterparts with efforts of City Schools to improve the educational attainment of their child, 30.1% and 17.1% respectively.
Attendance results show that all Direct Instruction schools show an overall gain from the period of 1995-96 to 2001-02. The attendance rate for Direct Instruction students is slightly higher than that of those in City Schools. Achievement data show that two of the four Direct Instruction cohorts outscore the City Schools counterparts on TerraNova Total Reading, with cohorts 2 and 3 being the exception. TerraNova Total Mathematics results varied. Results also reveal that students who experienced Direct Instruction reading for the longest period of time achieved at the highest level by grade 5, both cohort 1 and cohort 2. These results also indicate that for Direct Instruction reading, a minimum of three years is needed to obtain positive achievement patterns. In further examining whether students exposed to Direct Instruction had achievement scores that differed from those who had the City Schools curriculum, results indicated no statistically significant differences exist. Middle school preparation for Cohort 1 was assessed using the Maryland Functional Testing Program. These results demonstrate that Direct Instruction students not only passed the Maryland Functional Reading and Mathematics Test at higher rates than the comparison group, but also at a higher rate than City Schools.
As a result of this evaluation, recommendations are made to guide the implementation of the Direct Instruction model as well as further evaluations of Direct Instruction in City Schools. These include the continuation of the program in reading yet more dialogue on the efficacy of continuing in mathematics with more focused support, which may include a closer monitoring of the implementation by area coordinators. Additional recommendations include developing a method to accurately track financial expenditures, incorporating Direct Instruction as part of the City Schools curriculum and instruction design, and tracking student performance through middle school. In addition to recommending another program evaluation of Direct Instruction program in 2005-06, conducting an evaluation of the Core Knowledge program was also recommended to determine if there is an effect of having this program running concurrently with Direct Instruction at some of our schools.
Note: The document below requires Adobe Acrobat Reader. Click here to download a free copy
View the complete Direct Instruction Report: 
Full Report (413 KB)