Direct Instruction programs

The 60-second card

The finding

Fully designed, sequenced programs in the Engelmann tradition ("big DI") have produced consistently strong results over fifty years of studies.

Do this

Consider DI programs for intervention and for schools where students are far behind, and implement them as designed, with the placement tests and pacing they call for.

Best evidence

A meta-analysis of 328 studies and almost 4,000 effects found positive effects in reading, math, language, and spelling. Effects held up after instruction ended and were larger when students had more exposure (Stockard et al. 2018(opens in a new tab)).

328 studies

positive effects in reading, math, language and spelling

The 5-minute brief

Big DI and little di. "Direct Instruction" with capitals means specific scripted programs developed by Siegfried Engelmann and colleagues, such as Reading Mastery and Connecting Math Concepts. "Explicit" or "direct" instruction in lower case means the general teaching approach in principle 2. The two share a history but are not the same thing (Groshell interview(opens in a new tab)).

Why it works

The programs are built around the principles in this library: small steps, carefully chosen examples, frequent responses from every student, immediate correction, and built-in review until mastery. Placement tests put each student at the right starting point.

History, stated accurately. Project Follow Through (1968–1977) compared many early-grade models across the country, and Direct Instruction posted some of the strongest results. It was a very large comparison study, not a randomized trial, so cite it as history, not proof.

What it looks like

Grade band	In practice
K–2	Small groups placed by skill, teacher signals, students respond together, errors corrected immediately.
3–5	DI reading or math programs used for students below grade level, with frequent mastery checks.
6–8	Corrective reading programs for students who still decode slowly.
9–12	Rarely used in general classes; most relevant for intervention.

Common mistakes

Adopting a DI program and changing the pacing, skipping placement tests, or dropping the scripts. The meta-analysis found more exposure meant larger effects.
Treating DI as the only form of explicit teaching. Most teachers will use the explicit teaching principles without a scripted program.

What a leader looks for in 5 minutes

Are students grouped by placement test results?
Is the teacher following the program as designed, with every student responding?