Intervention power point

• Adams, G. L., & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research in Direct Instruction: 25 Years Beyond DISTAR. Seattle,WA: Educational Achievement Systems. Adams and Engelmann present a description of direct instruction and a meta-analysis of research on direct instruction. The authors summarize and report years if research on school implementation data on explicit instruction. This research clearly demonstrates that direct instruction program implementations were successful with the full range of teacher and student populations.
• Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B., (1989). An instructional model for teaching students how to learn. In J.L. Graden, J. E. Zins, & M.J. Curtis (Eds.) Alternative Educational Delivery Systems: Enhancing Instructional outcomes for all students. Pp. 391-411. Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists. This book provides a description of how instruction most effectively occurs for all students when teaching strategies. Deshler and colleagues describe the key components and instructional progression to teach the Strategies Intervention Model. The recommendations and strategies described are empirically validated across settings, teachers and students.
• Jones, B. F. (l986). Quality and equality through cognitive instruction. Educational Leadership, 43, 4-11

The authors of this article provide rationale for direct instruction in cognitive strategies that includes higher-level thinking and provides growth in all levels of thinking for all students.

Kameenui, E. J. & Carnine, D. W. (1998). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Kameenui and Carnine focus this text on the specifics of teaching, instruction and curricula necessary to provide diverse learners a fighting chance in today's settings, in- as well as outside the classroom. The authors describe concrete examples of how six key concepts (big ideas) in reading, mathematics, science, social studies and writing are taught, scaffolded, integrated and supported.

Madigan, Hall, & Glang (1997). Effective assessment and instructional practices for students with ABI. In A. Glang, G H.S. Singer, & B. Todis (Eds.) Students with Acquired Brain Injury: The School's Response. Pp. 123-184.Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Co. The focus of this book is on educational issues relating to students with acquired brain injury (ABI), and describes approaches that have been effective in improving the school experiences for students with ABI. The chapter by Madigan, Hall, and Glang provides the reader with a description and case study examples regarding planning and carrying out instruction for students with ABI using explicit teaching procedures for the design and delivery of instruction.

• Paris, S. G. (l986). Teaching children to guide their reading and learning. In T.E. Raphael (Ed.), The contexts of school-based literacy, Pp. ll5-l30. New York: Random House. This chapter provides a rationale for direct instruction in reading strategies and describes a program (Informed Strategies for Learning) to provide direct instruction in comprehension that includes declarative, procedural, and conditional information about strategies.
• Pearson, P.D., & Dole, J. A. (1987). Explicit comprehension instruction: A review of research and new conceptualization of instruction. Elementary School Journal, 88 (2) This article is a synthesis of research on three explicit instruction applications to comprehension instruction, reciprocal teaching, process training, and inference training. The authors conclude that we teach comprehension more effectively when using these explicit instructional approaches than by following the traditional basal reading paradigm of mentioning, practicing and assessing.
• Roehler, L. R., Duffy, G. G., and Meloth, M. S. (l984). What to be direct about in direct instruction in reading: Content-only versus process-into-content. In Raphael, T. E. (Ed.), The contexts of school-based literacy, Pp. 79-95. New York: Random House The authors argue for explicit instruction in reading processes and provide examples with particular references to low-aptitude students.
• Rosenshine, B. (1997). Advances in research on instruction. In J.W. Lloyd, E.J. Kameenui and D. Chard (Eds.) Issues in educating students with disabilities Pp. 197-221. Mahway, N. J.: Lawrence EarlbaumIn this chapter, Rosenshine presents research-based instructional advancements from three bodies of research including (a) cognitive processing, (b) teacher effectiveness, and (c) cognitive strategies as applied to student learning. This research allows educators to articulate and implement a major goal of education; "helping students develop well-organized knowledge structures" (p. 217).
• Tarver, S. G., (1996). Direct Instruction. In (W. Stainback and S. Stainback (Eds.) Controversial Issues Confronting Special Education: Divergent Perspectives (Second Ed.) Pp. 143-165. Boston: Allyn Bacon.

In this book chapter, Sara Tarver provides a clear and systematic explanation of direct instruction by means of a comparison to the constructivist/holistic approach. Here the author makes the case that effective instruction must incorporate principles from both behaviorism and holism.

*

INSTRUCTION COMPARISON

DIRECT/EXPLICT INSTRUCTION

• Students are directly and explicitly taught skills
• Solidifies that the nuances of content is understood

DISCOVERY INSTRUCTION

• Students arrive at learning on there own after resources are provided