Read more
About the author
John Lloyd is Professor of Education at the University of Virginia’s Curry School of Education, where his primary focus is in special education, particularly learning disabilities, emotional and behavioral disorders,and early reading instruction. He has also held several administrative posts, including Executive Director of the Council for Exceptional Children‘s Division for Learning Disabilities, and Chief Technology Officer for the Curry School.
Summary
This timely edited collection addresses a dilemma facing advocates of Direct Instruction: on the one hand, the rich history of Direct Instruction (DI) as a methodology built upon demonstrated evidence of student success; yet, and on the other hand, the mounting studies done by independent agencies that deliver disappointing results about DI’s efficacy. In other words, have the DI advocates been mistaken, or is it the analyses that are wrong?
To answer this question, John Lloyd and a group of highly respected contributing authors, investigates the following: first, what do the independent reports about the effectiveness of DI actually say? How were their conclusions reached, and how trustworthy are their methods? Next, can DI really be considered an evidence-based practice? What data demonstrate the efficacy of DI? Finally, what do weak points in the evidentiary base for DI actually reveal? What areas of future research can be identified from these studies?
Topics covered include an analysis of the evaluation methods used by government agencies, a discussion of how research outcomes are communicated to the public through integrative literature reviews, and an investigation into how different types of studies tend towards particular outcomes. In relating a history of research methods in education studies and, more specifically, in the study of Direct Instruction, this book advances a nuanced argument for the pursuit of evidence-based instruction—be it through DI or otherwise.
